On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 06:48 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 3:57 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 23:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > >> > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Jim Nasby <j...@nasby.net> wrote: > >> >> So there's no way to see if a particular privilege has been granted to > >> >> public. ISTM 'public' should be accepted, since you can't use it as a > >> >> role name anyway... > >> > >> > It's a bit sticky - you could make that work for > >> > has_table_privilege(name, oid, text) or has_table_privilege(name, > >> > text, text), but what would you do about the versions whose first > >> > argument is an oid? > >> > >> Nothing. The only reason to use those forms is in a join against > >> pg_authid, and the "public" group doesn't have an entry there. > > > > ISTM this bug should be on the open items list... > > I don't think this is a bug.
It clearly rates higher in importance than most of the things on the open items list of late... -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
