Re: ALTER OBJECT any_name SET SCHEMA name
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ALTER OBJECT any_name SET SCHEMA name |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 29821.1288985427@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ALTER OBJECT any_name SET SCHEMA name (Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: ALTER OBJECT any_name SET SCHEMA name
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr> writes: > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> Here's another question: if an extension's objects live (mostly or >> entirely) in schema X, what happens if the possibly-unprivileged owner >> of schema X decides to drop it? If the extension itself is considered >> to live within the schema, then "the whole extension goes away" seems >> like a natural answer. If not, you've got some problems. > Currently, creating an extension is superuser only. So the owner of > those objects is a superuser. My understanding is that the drop schema > will then fail without any more code. You're mistaken, and this case definitely does need more thought. A schema owner is presumed to have the unconditional right to drop anything in his schema, whether he owns it or not. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: