"Justin Pasher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Perfect. Just was I was looking for. So is it safe to actually run an update
> on the pg_catalog.pg_type.typowner column to change the user id from 101 to
> another existing user id without causing any other database weirdness?
Should work. In recent
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 12:51 AM
> To: Justin Pasher
> Cc: 'Richard Huxton'; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Fixing broken permissions for deleted user
>
>
"Justin Pasher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK. After playing around with this extensively I FINALLY got the permissions
> remove (from anything I can see).
> ...
> The table owner is also a different user from user id 101. However, it still
> gives me the same complaint.
> pg_dump: WARNING: own
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Huxton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 4:56 AM
> To: Justin Pasher
> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Fixing broken permissions for deleted user
>
> Justin Pasher wrote:
> &
Justin Pasher wrote:
I have a PostgreSQL 7.4.14 database that is being backed up nightly
using pg_dump. Some time back, we deleted a user from the server that
was no longer employed. This in turn caused some problems with ownership
of some of the tables (since the user didn't exist, the databas
I have a PostgreSQL 7.4.14 database that is being backed up nightly
using pg_dump. Some time back, we deleted a user from the server that
was no longer employed. This in turn caused some problems with ownership
of some of the tables (since the user didn't exist, the database could
only go by th
