Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BANLkTi=t-4wHCpjyW8+w_2s1Wm_AgskyfQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Shigeru Hanada <hanada@metrosystems.co.jp> writes: >> Attached patch implements along specifications below. It also includes >> documents and regression tests. Some of regression tests might be >> redundant and removable. > >> 1) "GRANT privilege [(column_list)] ON [TABLE] TO role" also work for >> foreign tables as well as regular tables, if specified privilege was >> SELECT. This might seem little inconsistent but I feel natural to use >> this syntax for SELECT-able objects. Anyway, such usage can be disabled >> with trivial fix. > > It seems really seriously inconsistent to do that at the same time that > you make other forms of GRANT treat foreign tables as a separate class > of object. I think if they're going to be a separate class of object, > they should be separate, full stop. Making them just mostly separate > will confuse people no end. I agree. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: