Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19140.1064930871@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta) (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > Stephan Szabo wrote: >> The problem I have with a super-user only solution is that it doesn't >> solve the problem for restores in general. > OK. Let's explore that. What does ownership mean? It does not normally mean the ability to bypass consistency checks; for example, if you put a CHECK constraint on a table, you don't get to violate it because you own the table. (Of course superuserness doesn't let you do so either...) I see where Stephan is coming from, but in my mind disabling consistency checks ought to be a feature reserved to the DBA (ie superuser), who presumably has some clue about the tradeoffs involved. I don't think ordinary users should be able to do it. If we can get the cost of performing the initial check down to something reasonable (and I don't mean "near zero", I mean something that's small in comparison to the other costs of loading data and creating indexes), then I think we've done as much as we should do for ordinary users. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: