Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> I will bet that this is more breakage from the DDL-code refactoring that
>> has been going on. I am getting closer and closer to wanting that
>> reverted. KaiGai-san seems to have been throwing out lots of special
>> cases that were there for good reasons.
> Isn't this just a475c6036?
Ah ... well, at least it was intentional. But still wrongheaded,
as this example shows. What we should have done was what the commit
message suggests, ie place a replacement check somewhere "upstream"
where it would apply to all object types. First thought that comes to
mind is to add a hack to pg_namespace_aclcheck, or maybe at some call
site(s).
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
