From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump fails to set index ownership |
Date: | 2005-01-11 05:25:31 |
Message-ID: | 12526.1105421131@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 07:28:52PM -0700, Michael Fuhr wrote:
>> pg_dump fails to set ownership on indexes.
> Is this a bug in pg_dump, or is it perhaps a bug in CREATE INDEX?
> Is there any reason CREATE INDEX shouldn't set the index owner to
> be the same as the table owner?
Hm. CREATE INDEX never did so in the past, and I suspect that at some
point along the line we explicitly decided that that was a good idea.
But it'd be worth thinking about some more. A related point is that
ALTER TABLE ... OWNER does not recurse to the table's indexes.
The behavior of pg_dump definitely is a bug because it is specifically
associated with the change to emit ALTER ... OWNER commands instead of
SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION commands --- if you select the latter option
then the indexes are created with the right ownership. So I went in and
fixed it to make the ALTER OWNER path behave the same as the historical
behavior has been.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nicolas Addington | 2005-01-11 05:28:30 | BUG #1381: invalid input syntax for integer: "" |
Previous Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-01-11 03:43:17 | Re: pg_dump fails to set index ownership |