From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
---|---|
To: | "Kasia Tuszynska" <ktuszynska(at)esri(dot)com>, "Szymon Guz" <mabewlun(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: postgres function does not handle PUBLIC - expected? |
Date: | 2010-08-10 19:40:37 |
Message-ID: | 4C6164E50200002500034463@gw.wicourts.gov |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Szymon Guz <mabewlun(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> No, there is no PUBLIC default role in ANY rdbms. In PostgreSQL
> there is PUBLIC schema, not role. In my PostgreSQL database there
> wasn't any such role... but I'll check that now... ok, I've
> checked, I've got 15 roles, none is names PUBLIC, what's more, I
> don't have any roles that cannot login.
>
> run simple query: SELECT rolname FROM pg_roles; and check the
> existence of the PUBLIC role.
Yeah, it's automatically there in a shadowy sort of way. Try this,
for example, in your cluster with no PUBLIC role:
test=# revoke create on database test from public;
REVOKE
test=# grant select on pg_class to public;
GRANT
-Kevin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Szymon Guz | 2010-08-10 19:49:38 | Re: postgres function does not handle PUBLIC - expected? |
Previous Message | charlie derr | 2010-08-10 19:37:27 | Re: postgres function does not handle PUBLIC - expected? |