From: | Edwin UY <edwin(dot)uy(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: GRANT USAGE ON SCHEMA |
Date: | 2025-06-15 10:06:11 |
Message-ID: | CA+wokJ_kPqs0RmKo3gFurJnb4P2zVe2_oA8b_RU7kHgughFfRw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Hi David J,
Yeah, sorry, I should have used different names, but yeah, I have also
created the a and b roles named the same as the schema.
Should have used schema_a, schema_b, role_a, role_b.
On Sun, Jun 15, 2025 at 11:19 AM David G. Johnston <
david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2025 at 3:09 PM Edwin UY <edwin(dot)uy(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I thought it was supposed to all 'full' access of one schema to the other
>>
>
> Where did you get the idea that objects (aside from roles) ever get
> privileges on other objects? Or did you also create roles "a" and "b" and
> are just using the wrong terminology here?
>
> There is also no such thing as permissions on one type of object somehow
> affecting your privileges on other object types. Your privileges on
> schemas will not influence (directly) your permissions on tables. Neither
> to grant additional privileges or to block them - say if you don't have
> usage on schema but do have select on a contained table. Corner-cases that
> do behave this way notwithstanding - it isn't reliable.
>
> David J.
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Edwin UY | 2025-06-16 04:40:09 | 'Sharing' data across different database. |
Previous Message | Kushal Shri | 2025-06-15 10:05:27 | Re: PostgreSQL Upgrade (v9.5 to v12) with Django 2.0 |