Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> 2. decide that the standard is braindead and just omit dumping the
>>> grantor when it's no longer available, but don't remove
>>> Which do people feel should be implemented? I can do whatever we
>>> decide; if no one has a strong opinion on the matter, my opinion is we
>>> do (2) which is the easiest.
>> Here is a patch implementing this idea, vaguely based on Russell's.
> Applied to CVS HEAD, 8.2 and 8.1.
> If we want to start tracking the grantor as a shared dependency, and
> have REVOKE work per spec (i.e. only revoke the privileges actually
> granted by the role executing REVOKE), those are separate patches (and
> they should be applied only to HEAD). This patch merely fixes the fact
> that pg_dumpall failed to work for busted databases.
Should there also be a doc patch for this, the document descriptions
seemed different to what is actually implemented. I'll check that
before I make any further comments.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jim C. Nasby||Date: 2007-05-15 22:34:11|
|Subject: Re: Seq scans roadmap|
|Previous:||From: Jim C. Nasby||Date: 2007-05-15 22:29:30|
|Subject: Re: Managing the community information stream|
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Russell Smith||Date: 2007-05-15 22:42:13|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Removing pg_auth_members.grantor (was Grantor
name gets lost when grantor role dropped)|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2007-05-15 20:26:46|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Removing pg_auth_members.grantor (was Grantor name gets lost when grantor role dropped)|