Re[2]: BUG #19379: Role pg_read_all_data don't allowed read large objects

Thanks for answers. And maybe pg_read_all_data without read lo don't allow read all data because need read data from lo. It's makes role pg_read_all_data useless. I hope for a speedy fix. четверг, 15 января 2026г., 16:47 +03:00 от Pierre Forstmann pierre(dot)forstmann(at)gmail(dot)com :

>It could be interesting to have a new predefined role
> pg_read_all_lo to be able to read all LO.
>Maybe it could be done with an extension with some background
> task to take into account newly created LO but it should be easier
> to have this coded without an extension.
>Le 15/01/2026 à 14:36, David G.
> Johnston a écrit :
>>On Thursday, January 15, 2026, PG Bug reporting form < noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>>>The
>>> following bug has been logged on the website:
>>>
>>>Bug reference:      19379
>>>Logged by:          Misha Shaygu
>>>Email address:      long76(dot)git(at)mail(dot)ru
>>>PostgreSQL version: 17.7
>>>Operating system:   Kubuntu 24.04
>>>Description:       
>>>
>>>My goal: create role for backup any database on server
>>>
>>>Steps:
>>>1. CREATE USER backup_user;
>>>2. GRANT pg_read_all_data TO backup_user;
>>>3. pg_dump my_db
>>>4. got error to read large object
>>>
>>>Following by links
>>>https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/predefined-roles.html
>>>https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/lo-implementation.html
>>>"SELECT privileges are required to read a large object" and role
>>>"pg_read_all_data" grant it, but it don't work!
>>>
>>>Please fix it, thanks!
>>
>>The docs you link note that all data is “tables, views,
>> sequences”.  Large objects are not listed.  Maybe that means the
>> name is a bit misleading but it’s working as documented.
>>
>>Likewise, the LO page doesn’t say anything about read all
>> being applicable.
>>
>>David J.
>>