Re: Schemas and template1

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > How about if we hard-wire template1 as being no-write to public
> > somewhere in the code, rather than in the db tables?
> 
> Seems pretty icky :-(
> 
> It occurs to me that maybe we don't need to worry.  The main reason why
> we've offered the advice "don't fill template1 with junk" in the past
> is that it was so hard to clear out the junk without zapping built-in
> entries.  But now, you really have to work hard at it to shoot yourself
> in the foot that way.  If you created junk in template1.public, no
> sweat:
>     \c template1 postgres
>     DROP SCHEMA public;
>     CREATE SCHEMA public;
>     -- don't forget to set its permissions appropriately
> (This assumes we get DROP SCHEMA implemented in time for 7.3, but
> I think we can build that based on Rod's pg_depend stuff.)  (Which
> I really really gotta review and apply soon.)
> 
> I'm of the opinion that template1 and public are not very special
> at the moment; the C-level code doesn't think either of them are
> special, which is why you can drop and recreate them if you have to.
> We should try not to re-introduce any low-level specialness.

It is strange we have to allow template1 open just for client stuff.  I
would really like to lock it down read-only.  I guess we can tell admins
to lock down public in template1, and all newly created databases will
be the same.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026