Обсуждение: doc change request (7.4.6, reference section, grant)

Hi doc keepers,

while I was looking for which privilege is to be granted to a user so the
user can lock tables, I found that information missing in the manual.
Therefore I tried to add it to the sgml doc sources:

postgresql-7.4.6/doc/src/sgml/ref/grant.sgml

134c134,135
<        <function>setval</function> functions.
---
>        <function>setval</function> functions. Also this privilege is
>        required to be able to <literal>LOCK</literal> tables.

Best regards
... Ralph ...

Ralph Graulich wrote:
> while I was looking for which privilege is to be granted to a user so
> the user can lock tables, I found that information missing in the
> manual.

It's on the reference page of LOCK, where it belongs.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

Hi Peter,

> It's on the reference page of LOCK, where it belongs.

That's where I finally found it. Comparing the notes on different SQL
commands and the reference page for GRANT, I still consider it's worth
mentioning it there, as it is not that obvious like SELECT, INSERT or
DELETE privileges.

The way the question occured while creating a user allowed to pg_dump
certain databases, but not allowed to do anything else. That way I only
granted SELECT privileges on the tables to that user, but that didn't
work, as pg_dump wants to lock the table.

But anyway, thanks to all the folks writing the documentation, in nearly a
hundred percent of the time the docs are really helpful.

Best regards
... Ralph ...

On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 09:16:11PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Ralph Graulich wrote:
> > while I was looking for which privilege is to be granted to a user so
> > the user can lock tables, I found that information missing in the
> > manual.
>
> It's on the reference page of LOCK, where it belongs.

It's useful (and consistent) to have a mention on the GRANT page.  Else,
the list in GRANT should be a plain list of available privileges,
without the text that currently follows each.

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[@]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"El destino baraja y nosotros jugamos" (A. Schopenhauer)

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> It's useful (and consistent) to have a mention on the GRANT page.
> Else, the list in GRANT should be a plain list of available
> privileges, without the text that currently follows each.

In any case, his proposed change was wrong because the required
privileges depend on the lock type.  Then you start duplicating all
that information and it's going to become a mess to maintain.  The
existing list gives a basic idea of what each privilege is for and
explicitly states that details are to be found on the reference page of
each command.  Note that the "basic ideas" are fairly static: the
SELECT privilege is always going to allow SELECT.  But I will resist
the demand to duplicate the privilege rules of each command and
function on the GRANT reference page.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

Ralph Graulich <maillist@shauny.de> writes:
> The way the question occured while creating a user allowed to pg_dump
> certain databases, but not allowed to do anything else. That way I only
> granted SELECT privileges on the tables to that user, but that didn't
> work, as pg_dump wants to lock the table.

Huh?  pg_dump only takes ACCESS SHARE lock, which requires only SELECT
privileges.

            regards, tom lane