From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, David Burns <david(dot)burns(at)fedex(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Version 14/15 documentation Section "Alter Default Privileges" |
Date: | 2023-11-03 16:53:46 |
Message-ID: | ZUUlmpxzsZMSZ7N_@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 11:01:59AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 05:49:42PM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > True. I have done that in the attached patch.
> > In this patch, it is mentioned *twice* that ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES
> > only affects objects created by the current user. I thought that
> > would not harm, but if it is too redundant, I can remove the second
> > mention.
>
> I think it is fine, and I have marked the patch as ready-for-committer.
>
> I think it should be applied to all branches, not just 14/15 as
> mentioned in the subject.
I have developed the attached patch on top of the alter default patch I
just applied. It is more radical, making FOR ROLE clearer, and also
moving my new FOR ROLE text up to the first paragraph, and reordering
the paragraphs to be clearer.
I think this is too radical for backpatch to 11/12, but I think
16/master makes sense after the minor releases next week.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
role.diff | text/x-diff | 3.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Westermann (DWE) | 2023-11-03 17:04:46 | Re: Incorrect mention of number of columns? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-11-03 16:42:47 | Re: Incorrect mention of number of columns? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2023-11-03 17:05:38 | Re: Document aggregate functions better w.r.t. ORDER BY |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2023-11-03 16:43:26 | Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses |