Re: [HACKERS] Nasty security bug with clustering

2004-05-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I'm in the middle of reviewing (read whacking around) Rod Taylor's patch for multiple operations in ALTER TABLE, so I'm afraid that no patch in the same area is likely to apply cleanly after the dust settles :-( OK, Bruce - just ignore the patch I sent in. I'll refactor it after Tom commits. Chr

Re: [HACKERS] Nasty security bug with clustering

2004-04-28 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I'm in the middle of reviewing (read whacking around) Rod Taylor's patch for multiple operations in ALTER TABLE, so I'm afraid that no patch in the same area is likely to apply cleanly after the dust settles :-( OK, Bruce - just ignore the patch I sent in. I'll refactor it after Tom commits. Chr

Re: [HACKERS] Nasty security bug with clustering

2004-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> No check is performed for being a superuser, the table owner or that it >> is a system table when marking an index for clustering: > I'm about to submit my SET WITHOUT CLUSTER patch, so I'll fix this bug > in that. I'm in the middle of revi

Re: [HACKERS] Nasty security bug with clustering

2004-04-28 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
No check is performed for being a superuser, the table owner or that it is a system table when marking an index for clustering: I'm about to submit my SET WITHOUT CLUSTER patch, so I'll fix this bug in that. Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: th

[HACKERS] Nasty security bug with clustering

2004-04-27 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
No check is performed for being a superuser, the table owner or that it is a system table when marking an index for clustering: usa=> alter table pg_class cluster on "pg_class_oid_index"; ALTER TABLE usa=> select oid from pg_class where relname='pg_class_oid_index'; oid --- 16613 (1 row) u