From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: CREATE CONVERSION |
Date: | 2002-07-09 03:47:57 |
Message-ID: | 815.1026186477@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> I believe the spec just demands USAGE on the underlying function for
>> the TRANSLATE case, and I don't see why it should be different for
>> CONVERT. (In principle, if we didn't use a C-only API, you could
>> just call the underlying function directly; so there's little point
>> in having protection restrictions different from that case.)
> Ok, so:
> (1) a CONVERSION can only be dropped by the superuser or its owner.
Okay ...
> (2) a grant syntax for CONVERSION is:
> GRANT USAGE ON CONVERSION <conversion_name> to
> {<user_name> | GROUP <group_name> | PUBLIC} [, ...]
No, I don't think a conversion has any privileges of its own at all.
You either have USAGE on the underlying function, or not.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-09 03:49:40 | Re: DROP COLUMN Progress |
Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-07-09 02:47:46 | Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly |