| From: | Nitin Motiani <nitinmotiani(at)google(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, "long76(dot)git(at)mail(dot)ru" <long76(dot)git(at)mail(dot)ru>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #19379: Role pg_read_all_data don't allowed read large objects |
| Date: | 2026-02-05 10:05:26 |
| Message-ID: | CAH5HC97jzTH-ig-w0C=X-zm8qXSACKf2UxuT8Mzo4c4Nmn1z9Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 7:15 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> >
> > 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.
>
> It's not contradicting our docs, but I think it likely still is an
> oversight. The goal of pg_read_all_data [1] was to allow running pg_dump
> without having to grant granular access, not being able to run pg_dump
> successfully due to LOs prevents that.
>
Hi,
I have proposed a fix for this on pgsql-hackers [1]. And tested that
with the fix, pg_read_all_data can dump large objects. Please take a
look and let me know what you think.
Thanks & Regards,
Nitin Motiani
Google
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2026-02-05 04:23:25 | Re: BUG #19392: PG_UPGRADE is non-functional on Windows |