Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
>> The problem I have with a super-user only solution is that it doesn't
>> solve the problem for restores in general.
> OK. Let's explore that. What does ownership mean?
It does not normally mean the ability to bypass consistency checks;
for example, if you put a CHECK constraint on a table, you don't get
to violate it because you own the table. (Of course superuserness
doesn't let you do so either...)
I see where Stephan is coming from, but in my mind disabling consistency
checks ought to be a feature reserved to the DBA (ie superuser), who
presumably has some clue about the tradeoffs involved. I don't think
ordinary users should be able to do it. If we can get the cost of
performing the initial check down to something reasonable (and I don't
mean "near zero", I mean something that's small in comparison to the
other costs of loading data and creating indexes), then I think we've
done as much as we should do for ordinary users.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
