On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 4:18 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 02:48:58PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > I think we need to either prevent dropping of temp namespaces *or* we need > to create a new entry in pg_namespace in this particular case.
Perhaps I am missing something, but it would be just more simple to now allow users to restrict that?
I can't parse what you are saying here. Now allow users to restrict what?
> I wonder if other "fun" things could happen if you go rename the namespace, > haven't tried that yet...
In this case the OID remains the same, still there are some cases where we rely on the namespace name, and one is CLUSTER. objectaddress.c uses as well get_namespace_name_or_temp(), which would be messed up, so it would be better to prevent a temp namespace to be renamed. Could ALTER SCHEMA OWNER TO also be a problem?