Re: pg_database datistemplate

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_database datistemplate
Date: 2002-10-24 22:48:46
Message-ID: 20021024224846.GA12481@dcc.uchile.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 04:39:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> > In the docs it is mentioned for datistemplate that
>
> > However, one can create a database using as template another DB that has
> > datistemplate set to false.
>
> Only if one is owner of the source database (or superuser).

Oh, I see. This is a doc bug, isn't it? I will submit a patch for
this. I think I've seen other oversights; will try to keep note of
them.

> Now that we have per-database ACLs, we should probably replace
> datistemplate with an access right; instead of setting it you'd
> do something like GRANT COPY ON DATABASE foo TO PUBLIC.

Sounds good. Altering system catalogs directly is "a bad thing", IMHO.

> (We'd also talked about replacing datallowconn with an access right,
> although that is more likely to break existing apps, since a fair
> number of them look at datallowconn.)

Maybe keep both for a release, and deprecate datallowconn?

Anyway, there are a number of minor things that could use ALTER <foo>
support. I'll try to make a note of those too, and fix them if I can.

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"La conclusion que podemos sacar de esos estudios es que
no podemos sacar ninguna conclusion de ellos" (Tanenbaum)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-10-24 23:15:53 Re: pg_database datistemplate
Previous Message Robert Treat 2002-10-24 22:40:09 Re: Hot Backup