Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Good point. Should we obscure pg_tablespace similarly to what we do for >> pg_shadow?
> Well, if we feel file locations are better left only visible to > super-users, we should. However, when managing disk space, aren't > normal users also often interested in which disk drives will store their > data? I don't see a big value to obscuring pgdata myself. My gut feeling is that it's more important to obscure pgdata than the external tablespace locations, basically because non-default tablespaces are likely to be on secondary disks with no particular relationship to interesting files (such as ~postgres/.profile). I can't back this up with a hard argument at this late hour though ... regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match