Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Applied to master, 9.2 and 9.1.
Thank you!
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgr
Excerpts from Alvaro Herrera's message of mié abr 18 18:27:27 -0300 2012:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié abr 18 13:05:03 -0300 2012:
> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> > > Per bug #6593, REASSIGN OWNED fails when the affected role owns an
> > > extensi
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Remember that we're talking about REASSIGN OWNED here, which will
> automatically reassign not only the extension itself, but also the
> contained objects. There is no danger that we will end up with an
> inconsistent installation. Also, if the objects in the extension h
Excerpts from Dimitri Fontaine's message of jue abr 19 12:42:00 -0300 2012:
> What about only issuing a WARNING that the extensions are not supported
> by reassign owned in 9.1 (and probably 9.2)?
Raise a warning and then do what? While you can continue reassigning
the rest of the objects to so
Hi,
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> However, ignoring that issue for the moment, this patch is making me
>> uncomfortable. I have a vague recollection that we deliberately omitted
>> ALTER EXTENSION OWNER because of security or definitional worries.
>>
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> However, ignoring that issue for the moment, this patch is making me
> uncomfortable. I have a vague recollection that we deliberately omitted
> ALTER EXTENSION OWNER because of security or definitional worries.
> (Dimitri, does that ring any bel
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> Here's a patch for that.
> Looks sane on a quick once-over. I do wonder about the comment,
> though. If we add ALTER EXTENSION .. OWNER, should that try to change
> the ownership of the objects contained inside t
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié abr 18 13:05:03 -0300 2012:
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Alvaro Herrera
>> wrote:
>> > Per bug #6593, REASSIGN OWNED fails when the affected role owns an
>> > extension. This would be triv
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié abr 18 13:05:03 -0300 2012:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > Per bug #6593, REASSIGN OWNED fails when the affected role owns an
> > extension. This would be trivial to fix if extensions had support code
> > for ALTER EXTENS
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Per bug #6593, REASSIGN OWNED fails when the affected role owns an
> extension. This would be trivial to fix if extensions had support code
> for ALTER EXTENSION / OWNER, but they don't. So the only back-patchable
> fix right now seems to
Hackers,
Per bug #6593, REASSIGN OWNED fails when the affected role owns an
extension. This would be trivial to fix if extensions had support code
for ALTER EXTENSION / OWNER, but they don't. So the only back-patchable
fix right now seems to be to throw an error on REASSIGN OWNED when the
user
11 matches
Mail list logo
