Re: BUG #13666: REASSIGN OWNED BY doesn't affect the relation underlying composite type

cpacejo@clearskydata.com wrote:

> =# CREATE TYPE foo AS (a integer, b integer);
>
> =# ALTER TYPE foo OWNER TO user1;
>
> =# SELECT typowner, relowner FROM pg_type JOIN pg_class ON typrelid =
> relfilenode WHERE typname = 'foo';
> -[ RECORD 1 ]---
> typowner | 16384
> relowner | 16384
>
> =# REASSIGN OWNED BY user1 TO user2;
>
> =# SELECT typowner, relowner FROM pg_type JOIN pg_class ON typrelid =
> relfilenode WHERE typname = 'foo';
> -[ RECORD 1 ]---
> typowner | 8713825
> relowner | 16384

Hmm.  I guess we're missing a recursion step somewhere.  I would have
assumed that the pg_class entry would also have a dependency on the
owner and should would have been visited in the initial loop.  Strange.

> Furthermore, while trying to replicate in another database, I encountered:
>
> =# REASSIGN OWNED BY user1 TO user2;
> ERROR:  unexpected classid 1418
>
> Not sure if this is related or not.

Not related.  1418 is pg_user_mapping (FDW stuff).  Not sure what should
happen here; my inclination without thinking too hard is that REASSIGN
OWNED should ignore that object and DROP OWNED should remove it.

--
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services