Re: ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES FOR ROLE is broken

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
>> Essentially the argument for allowing this without a permissions check
>> is "I'm not really doing anything to the schema, just preconfiguring the
>> rights that will be attached to a new object if I later (successfully)
>> create one in this schema".
>
> Makes sense to me; if we were going to do something, I'd say a warning
> would be better, but I'm alright with nothing too.

I vote for nothing. I always thought that check was wrong-headed.

>> Thoughts? If we change this, should we back-patch it? I'm inclined to
>> think it's a bug (especially if the restore-ordering hazard is real)
>> so we should back-patch.
>
> Agreed.

Seems reasonable.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company