Re: DEFAULT PRIVILEGES incorrect

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Sanket Mehta <
sanket(dot)mehta(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
> Below is my understanding of this issue:
>
> In ALTER DEFAULT PRIVLEGES statement, "FOR ROLE <target_name> "part is
> missing.
>

That's what Erwin has reported, yes.

>
> as per postgresql documentation target_name should follow below rule:
>
> target_name:
> The name of an existing role of which the current role is a member. If FOR
> ROLE is omitted, the current role is assumed.
>
> So target_name should be owner of this schema which is "foo".
>

I don't think the owner has anything to do with it. It says the name of an
existing role (of which the current role is a member), or the current role
if unspecified.

>
>
> Please let me know if I am right in my understanding or something is
> missing.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Sanket Mehta
> Sr Software engineer
> Enterprisedb
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Sanket Mehta <
> sanket(dot)mehta(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> Sure I will look into it and get back.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sanket Mehta
>> Sr Software engineer
>> Enterprisedb
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>>> Sanket - can you take a look at this when you get a minute please?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 4:23 AM, Erwin Brandstetter <brsaweda(at)gmail(dot)com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > This bug has not been addressed in pgAdmin 1.22.0, yet.
>>> >
>>> > If I run this as user postgres:
>>> >
>>> > ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES FOR ROLE foo IN SCHEMA test
>>> > GRANT SELECT ON TABLES
>>> > TO bar;
>>> >
>>> > Then the SQL pane says (still as user postgres):
>>> >
>>> > ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES IN SCHEMA test
>>> > GRANT SELECT ON TABLES
>>> > TO bar;
>>> >
>>> > Which is incorrect and misleading.
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> >
>>> > Erwin
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Erwin Brandstetter <
>>> brsaweda(at)gmail(dot)com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> The display of ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES statements can be incorrect.
>>> >>
>>> >> I reported this bug in 2013, but it seems like it never got through:
>>> >> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/528C2D00.6010905@falter.at
>>> >>
>>> >> Details, with steps to reproduce:
>>> >> https://redmine.postgresql.org/issues/694
>>> >>
>>> >> Just tested with version 1.20 again and the situation seems unchanged.
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards
>>> >> Erwin
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Page
>>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
>>> Twitter: @pgsnake
>>>
>>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>>
>>
>>
>

--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company