* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> The code definitely will complain if you try to interactively SET
> temp_tablespaces to a space you lack permissions for. However, there
> has never been a case in which people would hold still for warnings
> emitted as a consequence of values read from postgresql.conf or other
> background sources, and I doubt that the response would be different
> if we made this variable act like that. See for example past
> discussions about what to do with invalid entries in search_path.
Indeed, I fully expected the comparison argument to search_path, but I
have to admit that search_path feels a great deal more like CWD, while
the temp tablespaces is more like trying to write to /tmp and getting an
error.
That is to say, tablespaces and in particular temp tablespaces are much
more 'system' level than search paths. I don't expect regular users to
change their temp tablepace, while I expect them to change their search
path on a regular basis.
In any case, I was suggesting a NOTICE rather than a WARNING, though I
appreciate that both could make noise for users who don't expect it.
Still, I don't expect many users would complain about this, while they
would complain about a similar thing for search_path. Perhaps that's
not how they *should* act, but humans aren't always logical. :)
Thanks,
Stephen