Dear Tom, I'm sorry to bother you. i really care about this behavior, but i couldn't find the discussions you mentioned in pgsql-hackers archives. Would you please tell me more about the discussions(about date? the related issue?), so that i can search it and find it more easily? Thank you very much !
Regards -Dongni "Tom Lane" <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> ???? news:4759.1261758...@sss.pgh.pa.us... > "donniehan" <donnie...@126.com> writes: >> I have a question about the grantor. Why the grantor is owner in the >> following case ? I think it should be postgres(dba). > > Grants done by a superuser on an object he doesn't own are treated as > being done by the object owner instead. Otherwise you end up with > grants that don't have a clear chain of traceability to the owner, > which causes all sorts of un-fun issues for REVOKE. (I'm too lazy > to come up with the details right now, but if you care you can look > back in the pgsql-hackers archives to find the discussions where this > behavior was agreed on.) > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general >
