Robert Haas <> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane <> wrote:
>> The argument for not back-patching a bug fix usually boils down to
>> fear of breaking existing applications, but it's hard to see how
>> removal of a permission check could break a working application ---
>> especially when the permission check is as hard to trigger as this one.
>> How many table owners ever revoke their own REFERENCES permission?

> Sure, but that argument cuts both ways.  If nobody ever does that, who
> will be helped by back-patching this?
> I certainly agree that back-patching this change is pretty low risk.
> I just don't think it has any real benefits.

I think the benefit is reduction of user confusion.  Admittedly, since
Paul is the first person I can remember ever having complained about it,
maybe nobody else is confused.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to