Обсуждение: missing data in information_schema grant_* tables?
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.
On fre, 2010-01-15 at 12:00 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote: > 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... The whole point of role_table_grants is that it shows everything that table_privileges shows except privileges granted to public. So the behavior you observe is correct.
Dear Peter, >> (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... > > The whole point of role_table_grants is that it shows everything that > table_privileges shows except privileges granted to public. So the > behavior you observe is correct. This is not my understanding of ISO/IEC 9075-11:2003(E), page 57 : "5.39 ROLE_TABLE_GRANTS view Function Identifies the privileges on tables defined in this catalog that are available or granted by the currently applicable roles." From the definition above, ISTM that a privilege granted to PUBLIC should also appear, both because it is granted by me and available to me. Moreover, if I execute the SELECT of the view definition provided in the standard (a little bit simplified, and executed on the information schema instead of the "definition schema"), the PUBLIC stuff is displayed : psql> SELECT grantor, grantee, table_name FROM information_schema.table_privileges WHERE grantee IN (SELECTrole_name FROM information_schema.enabled_roles) OR grantor IN (SELECT role_name FROM information_schema.enabled_roles); ... fabien | calvin | foo fabien | PUBLIC | foo I think that the view definition in postgresql could simply reuse the view defined in the standard. -- Fabien.
On fre, 2010-01-15 at 15:06 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > The whole point of role_table_grants is that it shows everything that > > table_privileges shows except privileges granted to public. So the > > behavior you observe is correct. > > This is not my understanding of ISO/IEC 9075-11:2003(E), page 57 : You're right, it's a bug, but it's already fixed in 8.5. :-)
>> This is not my understanding of ISO/IEC 9075-11:2003(E), page 57 : > > You're right, it's a bug, but it's already fixed in 8.5. :-) Great! :-) Thanks, -- Fabien.