Re: Fwd: [Patch Review] TRUNCATE Permission

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Ryan Bradetich" <rbradetich(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: [Patch Review] TRUNCATE Permission
Date: 2008-09-02 01:33:54
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Ryan Bradetich" <rbradetich(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 1:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> [ something about "your patch" ]

> This is Robert Haas's patch for the September 2008 commit-fest.
> I am just offering my review.

Sorry about that, I got confused by the reply-to-a-reply.

> Does my first suggestion still make sense for removing the TRUNCATE in
> pg_class_aclmask() when pg_Authid.rolcatupdate is not set?

Probably. AFAICS it should be treated exactly like ACL_DELETE, so
anyplace that acl-whacking code is doing something for ACL_DELETE and
the patch doesn't add in ACL_TRUNCATE, I'd be suspicious ...

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2008-09-02 02:45:06 Re: [PATCH] allow has_table_privilege(..., 'usage') on sequences
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-09-02 01:17:06 [ Re: [patch] GUC source file and line number]