Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Jaime Casanova ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> updating the patch with one that only extends inserts. though, i >> haven't look at the col level privs patch yet.
> At least initially I wasn't planning to support column-level privileges > for sequences, so I don't think it will affect you much. Do people > think it makes sense to try and support that? USAGE certainly wouldn't be column-level in any case --- it'd be a privilege on the sequence as such. That end of it isn't the problem; the problem is that column-level privileges on the table make it hard to decide when to grant rights on the sequence, as I pointed out last time round: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-07/msg00624.php > As your patch appears more ready-for-commit than the column-level > privileges patch, I wouldn't worry about what code might have to move > around, that'll be for me to deal with in a re-sync with HEAD once your > patch is committed. I think that's backwards. The above message raises serious concerns about whether the USAGE-granting patch can be implemented at all in the presence of column-level privileges. I think the right thing is to get column privileges in and then see if it's possible to implement USAGE-granting compatibly. I don't want to commit a patch that is clearly going to be broken when (not if) column privileges arrive. I note also that no response was given to my worries about pg_dump behavior. In short, this patch isn't much more ready to commit than it was in the last fest. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
