On 1/9/13 8:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> However, it seems to me that this behavior is actually wrong for our
> purposes, as it represents a too-literal reading of the spec.  The SQL
> standard has no concept of privileges on schemas, only ownership.
> We do have privileges on schemas, so it seems to me that the consistent
> thing would be for this view to show any schema that you either own or
> have some privilege on.  That is the test should be more like 
> 
> 	pg_has_role(n.nspowner, 'USAGE')
> 	OR has_schema_privilege(n.oid, 'CREATE, USAGE')
> 
> As things stand, a non-superuser won't see "public", "pg_catalog",
> nor even "information_schema" itself in this view, which seems a
> tad silly.

I agree it would make sense to change this.

In response to

• Privileges for INFORMATION_SCHEMA.SCHEMATA (was Re: Small clarification in "34.41. schemata") at 2013-01-10 01:56:35 from Tom Lane

pgsql-docs by date

Next:	From: Peter Eisentraut	Date: 2013-02-05 02:58:33
	Subject: source download link in installation instructions
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2013-01-25 20:54:28
	Subject: Re: Manual Entries of commit_delay and commit_siblings are not complete.

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Zoltán Böszörményi	Date: 2013-01-31 21:12:01
	Subject: Re: Strange Windows problem, lock_timeout test request
Previous:	From: Pavel Stehule	Date: 2013-01-31 20:43:24
	Subject: Re: Re: proposal: a width specification for s specifier (format function), fix behave when positional and ordered placeholders are used