* Alex Hunsaker (bada...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 13:46, Alex Hunsaker <bada...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Im of the opinion if we are going to be meddling with the permission > > checks [...] > > Specifically: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-05/msg00566.php > > Sounds like most solutions would put us back to exactly what you were > trying to fix. :( Maybe its a moot point. But I figured while we are > talking about ALTER permissions....
Maybe I missed it, but I don't see anything that said ALTER TABLE was changed or fixed to address this concern. It might make the timing increase some, and it'd be interesting in any case to see just what the timing change looked like, but I don't know that it's really all that important.. At least if the timing didn't change much we could claim that this didn't affect this use-case, but I don't believe it shouldn't be done if it does. I don't see a way to actually *fix* the problem of not allowing someone who doesn't have all the right permissions to not lock the table at all. Taking a share lock and then trying to upgrade it isn't a good idea either. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature