Got it! Thank you all very much!
----- Original message -----
From: "David G. Johnston" <[email protected]>
To: "Tom Lane" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Li EF Zhang" <[email protected]>, "Laurenz Albe" <[email protected]>, "pgsql-generallists.postgresql.org" <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Can not ALTER TEXT SEARCH DICTIONARY intdict which is default in dict_int
Date: Wed, Aug 25, 2021 1:29 PM
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 9:20 PM Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:"David G. Johnston" <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 8:51 PM Li EF Zhang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thanks for your answer. My doubt is that since an ordinary user creates
>> the extension, shouldn't be this user the owner of the objects created
>> within the extension?
> While that is a possible implementation choice, that isn't what was chosen.
Let's be clear here: that is not some random implementor's decision.
That is *necessary*, else the feature is completely insecure.
Fair. Additionally, an extension that wishes for ordinary users to perform limited configuration can always supply a security definer function to facilitate such a change. Though I'm unsure how/if it would go about arranging role permissions without requiring a superuser.David J.
