Hello,
maybe a misunderstanding of my part, but your proposed modification doesn't matched with the current behaviour of the command as precisely the object privileges of the old owner are **NOT** transferred to the new owner along with the ownership Regards Gilles ----- Mail original ----- De: "Daniel Gustafsson" <dan...@yesql.se> À: "Laurenz Albe" <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> Cc: "gparc" <gp...@free.fr>, "pgsql-docs" <pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org> Envoyé: Mercredi 24 Janvier 2024 15:26:22 Objet: Re: SQL command : ALTER DATABASE OWNER TO > On 24 Jan 2024, at 15:23, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> wrote: > > On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 11:08 +0100, gp...@free.fr wrote: >> for this "ALTER DATABASE" form, it should be mentioned that after execution >> of the command, >> the old database owner loses all his privileges on it (even connection) >> although it might >> still owns schemas or objects (tables, index,...) inside it. >> >> Thanks in advance to add this important precision. > > How about this: > > diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ddl.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ddl.sgml > index 4044f0908f..44042f863c 100644 > --- a/doc/src/sgml/ddl.sgml > +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ddl.sgml > @@ -1891,6 +1891,8 @@ ALTER TABLE <replaceable>table_name</replaceable> OWNER > TO <replaceable>new_owne > Superusers can always do this; ordinary roles can only do it if they are > both the current owner of the object (or inherit the privileges of the > owning role) and able to <literal>SET ROLE</literal> to the new owning > role. > + All object privileges of the old owner are transferred to the new owner > + along with the ownership. > </para> Doesn't seem unreasonable to me, it won't make the docs harder to read and use for experienced users while it may make them easier to follow for new users. -- Daniel Gustafsson
