"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think the benefit is reduction of user confusion. Admittedly, since
>> Paul is the first person I can remember ever having complained about it,
>> maybe nobody else is confused.
> After going back-and-forth on
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The argument for not back-patching a bug fix usually boils down to
> >> fear of breaking existing applications, but it's hard to see how
> >> removal of a permission
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The argument for not back-patching a bug fix usually boils down to
> >> fear of breaking existing applications, but it's hard to see how
> >> removal of a permissio
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The argument for not back-patching a bug fix usually boils down to
>> fear of breaking existing applications, but it's hard to see how
>> removal of a permission check could break a working application ---
>> especially wh
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> In short, it seems like this statement in the docs is correctly describing
>>> our code's behavior, but said behavior is wrong and should be changed.
>>> I'd propose fi
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In short, it seems like this statement in the docs is correctly describing
>> our code's behavior, but said behavior is wrong and should be changed.
>> I'd propose fixing it like that in HEAD; I'm not sure if the back branc
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> In short, it seems like this statement in the docs is correctly describing
> our code's behavior, but said behavior is wrong and should be changed.
> I'd propose fixing it like that in HEAD; I'm not sure if the back branches
> should also be chang
Paul Jungwirth writes:
>> Also I don't understand why you wrote “You need the permission on both
>> tables”: Only the owner of a table can add constraints to it
> Ah, this piece was really helpful for me in making it click. Thanks so
> much! I added a couple new paragraphs to my post with a link
Also I don't understand why you wrote “You need the permission on both
tables”: Only the owner of a table can add constraints to it
Ah, this piece was really helpful for me in making it click. Thanks so
much! I added a couple new paragraphs to my post with a link back to
this thread. I feel li
On 2017-03-29 08:05:23 -0700, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
> On 03/29/2017 06:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >Karsten Hilbert writes:
> >>Being able to create foreign keys may allow to indirectly
> >>discover whether certain values exists in a table which I
> >>don't otherwise have access to (by means of failu
On 03/29/2017 06:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Karsten Hilbert writes:
Being able to create foreign keys may allow to indirectly
discover whether certain values exists in a table which I
don't otherwise have access to (by means of failure or
success to create a judiciously crafted FK).
Aside from th
Karsten Hilbert writes:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 09:47:40AM -0700, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
>> I wrote a blog post about the Postgres permissions system, and I thought I'd
>> share:
>> http://illuminatedcomputing.com/posts/2017/03/postgres-permissions/
> Not that I am an expert in any way but here'
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 09:47:40AM -0700, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
> I wrote a blog post about the Postgres permissions system, and I thought I'd
> share:
>
> http://illuminatedcomputing.com/posts/2017/03/postgres-permissions/
> I also shared a few opinions amidst the facts (like that `USAGE` for s
Hi All,
I wrote a blog post about the Postgres permissions system, and I thought
I'd share:
http://illuminatedcomputing.com/posts/2017/03/postgres-permissions/
The main point I wanted to convey, which I somehow never grasped
confidently from reading the docs or other articles, is how permiss
14 matches
Mail list logo
