Hello pgdevs,
I'm trying to use the information_schema, and I'm looking at the grant
tables. ISTM that some views do not show all expected permissions.
psql> CREATE TABLE foo(); psql> CREATE USER calvin NOLOGIN; psql> GRANT SELECT ON TABLE foo TO calvin; psql> GRANT
INSERTON TABLE foo TO PUBLIC; -- not really a good idea
psql> \dp Access privileges Schema | Name | Type | Access privileges | Column access
privileges
--------+------+-------+-----------------------+-------------------------- public | foo | table |
fabien=arwdDxt/fabien| : calvin=r/fabien : =a/fabien
INSERT to PUBLIC is shown on the last line of the access privileges
column. However, when looking at the information_schema:
psql> SELECT grantor, grantee, privilege_type FROM information_schema.role_table_grants WHERE table_name =
'foo';grantor | grantee | privilege_type
---------+---------+---------------- fabien | fabien | SELECT fabien | fabien | INSERT fabien | fabien | UPDATE
fabien | fabien | DELETE fabien | fabien | TRUNCATE fabien | fabien | REFERENCES fabien | fabien | TRIGGER
fabien | calvin | SELECT
(8 rows)
My point is that the grant to "PUBLIC" does not show in the information
schema. However, it appears in the table_privileges view:
psql> SELECT grantor, grantee, privilege_type FROM
information_schema.table_privileges WHERE table_name='foo'; grantor | grantee | privilege_type
---------+---------+---------------- ... same as previous query ... fabien | PUBLIC | INSERT
(1) Would you agree that it is a "bug"? That is, if the grantee is PUBLIC,
it is an enabled role for the current user, so it should appear in the
role_table_grants view...
(2) If yes is the answer to the previous question, and in order to fix it,
would it be acceptable to drop the view definitions of role_table_grants
based on the pg_catalog and rely on the table_privileges view instead, if
possible (it looks so, but there may be some issues)? Or should the
current view definition be simply reworked?
--
Fabien.