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

Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Shigeru HANADA <hanada(at)metrosystems(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning
Date: 2011-04-14 18:43:52
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Shigeru HANADA
<hanada(at)metrosystems(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> In addition to the 2nd GRANT above, "GRANT SELECT (colour) ON stuff TO
> user_a" (omitting TABLE) will succeed too because parser assumes that
> the target object is a regular table if object type was TABLE or
> omitted. This inconsistent behavior would be an oversight and need to
> be fixed.


> How about to drop "GRANT xxx ON FOREIGN TABLE foo" syntax support and
> use "GRANT xxx ON [TABLE] foo" for foreign tables?  ISTM that "ON
> FOREIGN TABLE" specification is useless because possible privilege
> type would be same as TABLE.

-1.  We should be consistent about treating foreign tables as their
own object type - and the possible privilege types are NOT the same -
only SELECT is supported.

> Probabry we should mention in GRANT documents that ALL TABLES
> IN SCHEMA is considered to include foreign tables.

Or else change the behavior so that it doesn't, which would probably be my vote.

Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-04-14 18:45:57
Subject: Re: Proposal for GSoC : ADJ dashboard (Administration related software)
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-04-14 18:40:52
Subject: Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group