Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Bug / shortcoming in has_*_privilege

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug / shortcoming in has_*_privilege
Date: 2010-08-11 07:57:24
Message-ID: 1281513444.2142.1473.camel@ebony (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 23:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> wrote:
> >> So there's no way to see if a particular privilege has been granted to public. ISTM 'public' should be accepted, since you can't use it as a role name anyway...
> 
> > It's a bit sticky - you could make that work for
> > has_table_privilege(name, oid, text) or has_table_privilege(name,
> > text, text), but what would you do about the versions whose first
> > argument is an oid?
> 
> Nothing.  The only reason to use those forms is in a join against
> pg_authid, and the "public" group doesn't have an entry there.

ISTM this bug should be on the open items list...

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Vik ReykjaDate: 2010-08-11 08:00:31
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Previous:From: Marko TiikkajaDate: 2010-08-11 07:54:00
Subject: Re: assertions and constraint triggers

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group