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

Re: Index build temp files

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index build temp files
Date: 2013-01-09 22:09:54
Message-ID: 3487.1357769394@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 9 January 2013 21:42, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> If we were designing this from scratch I'd agree that a separate TEMP
>> privilege would be a good thing.  But bolting one on now is likely
>> to create more problems than it fixes.  Particularly since it doesn't
>> actually fix any of the concrete problems enumerated in this thread.
>> 
>> I continue to think that getting rid of the privilege check would be
>> a more useful answer than changing which privilege is tested.

> I wasn't suggesting that we test for TEMP instead of CREATE; what I
> meant was we would test for CREATE *OR* TEMP to give more options for
> management.

[ shrug... ]  That's weird, ie unlike the behavior of other privileges,
and it *still* doesn't fix any of the problems Stephen complained of.

			regards, tom lane


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andres FreundDate: 2013-01-09 22:14:52
Subject: Re: [PATCH] unified frontend support for pg_malloc et al and palloc/pfree mulation (was xlogreader-v4)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2013-01-09 22:06:49
Subject: Re: Reducing size of WAL record headers

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