Re: CREATE DATABASE WITH OWNER '??';

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CREATE DATABASE WITH OWNER '??';
Date: 2000-05-10 12:47:31
Message-ID: 39195A63.D1F7CF6C@tm.ee
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 May 2000, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 9 May 2000, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> >
> > > CREATE DATABASE WITH OWNER?
> >
> > Databases already have owners, so this syntax extensions (not a bad idea
> > IMHO) isn't going to change the substance of things really.
>
> tables have owners .. right now, as far as I can tell, the database itself
> doesn't have an owner. Unless I'm missing something, any user that can
> connect to a database can create new tables in that database, regardless
> of what they can do to the existing tables in that database ...

hannu=# select * from pg_database;
datname | datdba | encoding | datpath
-----------+--------+----------+-----------
template1 | 501 | 0 | template1
hannu | 501 | 0 | hannu
(2 rows)

I'm pretty sure that the datdba field is the owner id.

That anyone is allowed to do anything is another matter.

-----------------
Hannu

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 2000-05-10 13:04:36 lsof: can't read inpcb at 0x00000000
Previous Message The Hermit Hacker 2000-05-10 12:18:41 Re: Comparison PostgreSQL 7.0 vs. Interbase2000 (fwd)