Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > Alright, this isn't quite as open-and-shut as it may have originally > seemed. We're apparently cacheing the temp tablespaces which should be > used, even across set role's and security definer functions, which I > would argue isn't correct.
Ah. Yeah, that would be true. We do have mechanism that forces search_path to be recomputed across changes of active role, but it's expensive to do that, and it seems of rather debatable value to do it here --- it certainly wouldn't improve Stephen's original problem, much less the other issues he raises here. What would people think of just eliminating the access-permissions checks involved in temp_tablespaces? It would likely be appropriate to change temp_tablespaces from USERSET to SUSET if we did so. So essentially the worldview would become that the DBA is responsible for the temp_tablespaces setting, not individual users. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers