On fre, 2012-02-24 at 14:27 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > (Thinks some more...) Actually, the point of SECURITY DEFINER on a > trigger function is to run as somebody other than the table owner, > to wit the function owner. And with an anonymous function there > couldn't be any other owner. So I guess there is no need for this > clause in this context.
You're right. The whole clause will be useless in this case. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
