Re: [HACKERS] Permissions for large-object comments

2001-08-27 Thread Shane Wegner

On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 02:45:40AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
> 
> > Shane Wegner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > test=> \lo_unlink 89803
> > > ERROR:  pg_description: Permission denied.
> >
> > Hmm.  Maybe those client-side comment manipulations in psql aren't
> > such a hot idea.  I know I never tested them as non-superuser :-(
> 
> :-(
> 
> > Shane, try that from a superuser Postgres userid.  Meanwhile,
> > it's back to the drawing board for us.
> 
> I'm not sure about the future of the large objects, so I'm less eager to
> invent a new mechanism.  I'm open to ideas, however.

Well as I'm not a developer, this it out of my league. 
However, if the future of large objects is in question, is
there a better way I should be storing large chunks of
binary data in the database.  The text column doesn't seem
to support it.
Regards,
Shane

-- 
Shane Wegner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  http://www.cm.nu/~shane/
PGP:  1024D/FFE3035D
  A0ED DAC4 77EC D674 5487
  5B5C 4F89 9A4E FFE3 035D

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html



[HACKERS] Permissions for large-object comments

2001-08-23 Thread Tom Lane

Shane Wegner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> test=> \lo_unlink 89803
> ERROR:  pg_description: Permission denied.

Hmm.  Maybe those client-side comment manipulations in psql aren't
such a hot idea.  I know I never tested them as non-superuser :-(

Shane, try that from a superuser Postgres userid.  Meanwhile,
it's back to the drawing board for us.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html