From: | Sam Darwin <samuel(dot)d(dot)darwin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18383: creation of public schema is not consistent |
Date: | 2024-03-08 01:48:28 |
Message-ID: | CANEqPjG2xbmhiWMJ_LHYjtVO0Y=EdxGfPyN0nXkW4PE1L=6vHQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
> > I'm not really seeing a bug here, and you haven't provided sufficient
> detail about your actual problem to act on it.
>
Just tested again. It seems the directionality matters, as follows:
If the dumpfile says "standard public schema", while the new DB has no
schema description. OK.
If the dumpfile has an empty schema description "", while the new DB is
using the default "standard public schema" . ERROR.
pg_restore: error: could not execute query: ERROR: must be owner of schema
public
Command was: COMMENT ON SCHEMA public IS '';
There is a phenomenon "the curse of knowledge". It means, that error looks
perfectly clear to you, but for somebody who didn't know a COMMENT is a
DESCRIPTION, and that a schema has a COMMENT (I never adjusted those), and
why public is '' , and why a GRANT ALL didn't provide permissions, and why
a COMMENT was missing (not at all intentionally) because of a forgotten
action many months earlier. One is simply attempting to restore a database.
But now that I have also been cursed by the knowledge I will agree there is
no bug. Nothing needs to be done. Well, maybe, consider if terse error
messages could be more verbose.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2024-03-08 06:00:16 | BUG #18384: It's not bug just question about documentation |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-03-07 20:11:41 | Re: BUG #18383: creation of public schema is not consistent |