| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Revoke PUBLIC CREATE from public schema, now owned by pg_databas |
| Date: | 2022-11-30 15:44:12 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ+AFWhTPZnZSqDiuH5fCV6cF9df+fcJhmSoLqkBTiPEA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 10:01 AM Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 08:39:23AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 2:07 AM Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > > In general, the documentation should prefer simpler decision trees.
> >
> > True, but I found the current text confusing, which is also something
> > to consider.
>
> Could remove the paragraph about v14. Could have that paragraph say
> explicitly that the REVOKE is a no-op. Would either of those be an
> improvement?
Well, I thought what I proposed was a nice improvement, but I guess if
you don't like it I'm not inclined to spend a lot of time discussing
other possibilities. If we get some opinions from more people that may
make it clearer which direction to go; if I'm the only one that
doesn't like the way it is now, it's probably not that important.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-11-30 18:01:53 | pgsql: Reject missing database name in pg_regress and cohorts. |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2022-11-30 15:01:36 | Re: pgsql: Revoke PUBLIC CREATE from public schema, now owned by pg_databas |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-11-30 15:54:16 | Re: pg_dump bugs reported as pg_upgrade bugs |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2022-11-30 15:41:14 | Re: New docs chapter on Transaction Management and related changes |