From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Evgeni Golov <evgeni(at)golov(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18625: user-created extensions change ownership to "postgres" after upgrade |
Date: | 2024-09-20 17:36:23 |
Message-ID: | 2464496.1726853783@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Evgeni Golov <evgeni(at)golov(dot)de> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 12:18:00PM GMT, Tom Lane wrote:
>> You could do that as superuser, but it's not really enough because
>> there are pg_shdepend entries that ought to be added/updated.
> What happens if those (pg_shdepend.refobjid, pg_extension.extowner)
> are/get out of sync?
Stuff like DROP OWNED BY will misbehave, because it won't detect that
that extension belongs to that role.
>> The bigger picture here is that it's not just the pg_extension object
>> whose ownership is at stake. There are going to be objects belonging
>> to the extension that probably --- but not certainly --- should have
>> the same owner as the extension.
> Is there a way to find/list those related objects?
Sure, \dx+ in psql, or look in pg_depend for 'e' dependencies.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-09-20 17:55:02 | Re: BUG #18624: Memory Leak Issue with PostgreSQL Connection During COPY Command Execution. |
Previous Message | Evgeni Golov | 2024-09-20 17:05:06 | Re: BUG #18625: user-created extensions change ownership to "postgres" after upgrade |