Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Uh, that seems like it adds extra complexity just for this single case.
>
> Yeah. I've dropped the idea personally -- the suggestion that the table
> owner can provide a SECURITY DEFINER procedure to do the TRUNCATE if he
> wants to allow others to do it seems to me to cover the problem.
>
> > Why don't we allow TRUNCATE by non-owners only if no triggers are
> > defined, and if they are defined, we throw an error and mention it is
> > because triggers/contraints exist?
>
> I don't think we should put weird special cases in the rights checking
> to allow this -- that's usually a recipe for introducing unintended
> security holes.
Yea, good point.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073