Re: LOCK TABLE Permissions

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: LOCK TABLE Permissions
Date: 2015-05-12 02:46:38
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTk=TXT=rrWqG65CN1hf29bbCEBLfMneHzFaVa4Sisnkg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 4:53 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Yeah, it might not be bad to have tests for all the different lock types
> and make sure that the permissions match up. I'd probably put those
> tests into 'permissions.sql' instead though.

You mean privileges.sql, right? I just wrote a patch with that. I'll
create a new thread with the patch.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2015-05-12 02:52:00 Improving regression tests to check LOCK TABLE and table permissions
Previous Message Andres Freund 2015-05-12 02:34:06 Re: Minor ON CONFLICT related fixes