Re: wrong message on REASSIGN OWNED

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: wrong message on REASSIGN OWNED
Date: 2011-06-13 14:14:09
Message-ID: 4DF61B31.5020404@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 06/13/2011 09:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Jaime Casanova<jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> btw, i'm allowed to use ALTER TABLE to assign a new owner (even an
>>> unprivileged one) to a system catalog, probably that's a bug.
>> +1 for tightening that up in 9.2.
> Nonsense. You won't like the results of "DELETE FROM pg_proc;" either,
> but we don't try to put training wheels on superusers.

Yeah. Amusing anecdote along these lines: I had fun recently recovering
the situation for someone who had for reasons I can't even imagine done
"delete from pg_database;" on their production system.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2011-06-13 14:19:33 Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-06-13 14:07:17 Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY