-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane wrote:
I've done the above and now withdraw my complaints about this patch.
Excellent, thank you.
I notice however that the patch seems to have touched only about half a
dozen of the information_schema views ... shouldn't more of them
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
What became of my objection that the test should be on USAGE privilege
for the containing schema instead?
Was this addressed?
Yes, we arrived at this:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2006-09/msg00252.php
which does what
I wrote:
If you're really intent on making it work this way, my vote is to
expose namespace.c's isOtherTempNamespace() as a SQL-callable function,
and add a test on that to the info-schema views, rather than relying on
is_visible or explicit knowledge of the temp-schema naming convention.
Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... I can't think of a use case where a user would not want to
append a is_visible clause to the query above. That or start
tracking which pg_temp_ schema belongs to whom.
Well, I'm still having a problem with this, because it seems like a
pretty
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane asked:
Superusers can access anything they want to. What's your point?
The spec says accessible ...
disclaimer
Not trying to lecture you Tom :), just posting my argument
here for others.
/disclaimer
Temp tables are special because the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) writes:
Sequences were not being shown due to the use of lowercase 's' instead
of 'S', and the views were not checking for table visibility with
regards to temporary tables and sequences.
What became of my objection that the test should be on USAGE privilege
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I wrote:
Sequences were not being shown due to the use of lowercase 's' instead
of 'S', and the views were not checking for table visibility with
regards to temporary tables and sequences.
Tom Lane replied:
What became of my objection that the
Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane replied:
What became of my objection that the test should be on USAGE privilege
for the containing schema instead?
I took a stab at implementing this, but what exactly would we check? Looks
like all the temp tables have automatic usage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
SELECT *,has_schema_privilege(oid,'USAGE') FROM pg_namespace;
Well, if you test it as a superuser, it's going to return TRUE every
time.
Exactly. So I'm not seeing how we can use USAGE as a reliable test for
the case where a temporary table was
Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SELECT *,has_schema_privilege(oid,'USAGE') FROM pg_namespace;
Well, if you test it as a superuser, it's going to return TRUE every
time.
Exactly. So I'm not seeing how we can use USAGE as a reliable test for
the case where a temporary table was
10 matches
Mail list logo