Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Bruce Momjian
Тема
Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes
Дата
Msg-id
200203052108.g25L8s621124@candle.pha.pa.us
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes Yury Bokhoncovich <byg@center-f1.ru>
Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes Yury Bokhoncovich <byg@center-f1.ru>
Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: ALTER TABLE OWNER: change indexes Yury Bokhoncovich <byg@center-f1.ru>

OK, I propose that we do the index part of this patch too.  No one seems
to know if seting the index user id to zero in pg_class will break
things so we may as keep it consistent.  Can you send that over?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Neil Conway wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-03-05 at 01:50, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian  writes:
> > > > OK, the issue with this patch is that it fixes ownership of INDEXES. 
> > > 
> > > I thought the resubmitted patch did no such thing?
> 
> That's correct.
> 
> > > > Now, we are we going with this?  Can we just remove ownership of indexes
> > > > totally?  And sequences?
> > > 
> > > How did you get from indexes to sequences?  The issues are completely
> > > different.
> > 
> > The poster mentioned it.  What does it matter?  I am asking.
> 
> I think ownership is still valid for sequences (after I asked about it,
> I thought about it some more -- sequences can be used by multiple
> tables, and their ownership is actually used by the system).
> 
> > > I'm in favor of considering that indexes and toast tables have no
> > > separate ownership, and storing zero in pg_class.relowner for them.
> > > However, I have not looked to see what this might break.  It might
> > > be more trouble than it's worth.
> > 
> > Well, before we reject this patch, we should decide what we are going to
> > do.  Of course, indexes are still in pg_class, and putting zero in there
> > for a user could be trouble.  It may be easier to just apply the patch. 
> 
> Well, the latest version of "the patch" doesn't do much -- it just
> refactors the code involved, there is no change in functionality (I
> removed the ownership-changing code on Tom's request). Please apply it
> -- it's quite uncontroversial. If at some later date we decide to apply
> the additional ownership changing code, that's simple to do.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Neil
> 
> -- 
> Neil Conway 
> PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
> 
> http://archives.postgresql.org
> 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления
От: Neil Conway
Дата:
От: Neil Conway
Дата:
FAQ