Alvaro Herrera escribi=F3:
> On the other hand, running REASSIGN OWNED means to reassign ownership o=
f
> objects to some other user. There is no reason this cannot be done to
> shared objects as well as local objects. I note, though, that REASSIGN
> OWNED's documentation mentions "objects in the current database"; but i=
n
> spirit, the point of it is to drop users. So applying to shared object=
s
> seems within charter to me.
FWIW, the docs for REASSIGN OWNED have a note at the bottom:
"The REASSIGN OWNED command does not affect the ownership of any
databases owned by the role."
This was added because Josh Berkus commanded us to:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4BE2367C.30605@agliodbs.com
As far as I'm concerned, that note should be removed. Also, there's
this bit:
"Because REASSIGN OWNED only affects the objects in the current
database, it is usually necessary to execute this command in each
database that contains objects owned by a role that is to be removed."
This would be reworded thusly:
"Because REASSIGN OWNED does not affect objects in other
databases, it is usually necessary to execute this command in each
database that contains objects owned by a role that is to be removed."
--=20
=C1lvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
