> Fix two bugs in change_owner_recurse_to_sequences: it was grabbing an
> overly strong lock on pg_depend, and it wasn't closing the rel when done.
> The latter bug was masked by the ResourceOwner code, which is something
> that should be changed.

I assume that this behaviour makes change owner on a table change owner
of serial sequences?

Should we perhaps also propagate grant insert on a table to grant
select, update on dependent serial sequences?

Chris

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org

Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> I assume that this behaviour makes change owner on a table change owner
> of serial sequences?

Yeah.

> Should we perhaps also propagate grant insert on a table to grant
> select, update on dependent serial sequences?

Doesn't really follow. That code is maintaining an invariant: the owner
of a table owns the associated indexes, toast table, sequences, etc.
There's no system-wide assumption that sequence privileges track table
privileges.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 01:35:20AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> > Should we perhaps also propagate grant insert on a table to grant
> > select, update on dependent serial sequences?
>
> Doesn't really follow. That code is maintaining an invariant: the owner
> of a table owns the associated indexes, toast table, sequences, etc.
> There's no system-wide assumption that sequence privileges track table
> privileges.

I brought this up a few months ago. Tom, weren't your objections
based more on implementation concerns than on whether the idea
itself had merit?

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql...0/msg00511.php

--
Michael Fuhr
http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org> writes:
> I brought this up a few months ago. Tom, weren't your objections
> based more on implementation concerns than on whether the idea
> itself had merit?

No, my point was that making implicit sequences work transparently
requires more thought than this. I'd like to see a fairly complete
plan put forward before we start installing random hacks on permissions.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq