Re: DROP OWNED BY fails to clean out pg_init_privs grants

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Noah Misch <nmisch(at)google(dot)com>
Subject: Re: DROP OWNED BY fails to clean out pg_init_privs grants
Date: 2024-05-25 14:47:57
Message-ID: 847249.1716648477@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com> writes:
> Having an pg_init_privs entry referencing a non-existing user is
> certainly of no practical use.

Sure, that's not up for debate. What I think we're discussing
right now is

1. What other cases are badly handled by the pg_init_privs
mechanisms.

2. How much of that is practical to fix in v17, seeing that
it's all long-standing bugs and we're already past beta1.

I kind of doubt that the answer to #2 is "all of it".
But perhaps we can do better than "none of it".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Xing Guo 2024-05-25 15:52:22 Fix an incorrect assertion condition in mdwritev().
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2024-05-25 14:09:44 Re: DROP OWNED BY fails to clean out pg_init_privs grants