From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Gauthier, Dave" <dave(dot)gauthier(at)intel(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: non-owner superuser needs to be able to vacuum |
Date: | 2009-06-03 14:38:52 |
Message-ID: | 4290.1244039932@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Gauthier, Dave" <dave(dot)gauthier(at)intel(dot)com> writes:
> A superuser cannot vacuum tables. The error message is "WARNING: skipping "thetable" --- only table or database owner can vacuum it"
Are you *certain* the active role is really a superuser? I'd say that
that message is sufficient proof that it isn't.
> The superuser was defined like this...
> create role cover_super SUPERUSER LOGIN;
> grant all on database cover to cover_super;
> grant all privileges on map_src_info to cover_super;
> grant all privileges on insts to cover_super;
> grant all privileges on temp_pins to cover_super;
Granting privileges to a superuser is 100% pointless...
I wonder whether you are supposing that the superuser property can be
inherited by some other role via role membership grant. It doesn't work
that way. You must actually be cover_super here to be superuser.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jennifer Trey | 2009-06-03 15:03:05 | Re: High I/O writes activity on disks causing images on browser to lag and not load |
Previous Message | Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz | 2009-06-03 14:36:31 | Re: High I/O writes activity on disks causing images on browser to lag and not load |