On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 02:48:23AM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 10 January 2013 02:36, Noah Misch <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 03:20:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> What would people think of just eliminating the access-permissions > >> checks involved in temp_tablespaces? It would likely be appropriate to > >> change temp_tablespaces from USERSET to SUSET if we did so. So > >> essentially the worldview would become that the DBA is responsible for > >> the temp_tablespaces setting, not individual users. > > > > Allowing that the new behavior could be clearer, that gain is too small to > > justify the application compatibility hazard of making temp_tablespaces > > SUSET. > > I don't see something we can do here that clearly improves things overall. > > Can't we do both behaviours? Skip permissions if using a value form > .conf, but don't if the user sets it themselves.
We could, though I share Tom's reluctance[1]. [1] http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/[email protected] -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
