Re: Why grantor is owner in this case? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From donniehan
Subject Re: Why grantor is owner in this case?
Date
Msg-id hh96uh$9ja$1@news.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why grantor is owner in this case?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Why grantor is owner in this case?  (Erik Jones <ejones@engineyard.com>)
List pgsql-general
Hi Tom,
 
Thanks for your information. One more question, if i wanna get the accurate information about grantor(Sometimes the application just needs the information), what can i do?
Apparently i cannot get from the acls, so where can i get the info?
 
-Dongni


"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> ???? news:4759.1261758025@sss.pgh.pa.us...
> "donniehan" <donniehan@126.com> writes:
>> I have a question about the grantor. Why the grantor is owner in the following case ?  I think it should be postgres(dba).
>
> Grants done by a superuser on an object he doesn't own are treated as
> being done by the object owner instead.  Otherwise you end up with
> grants that don't have a clear chain of traceability to the owner,
> which causes all sorts of un-fun issues for REVOKE.  (I'm too lazy
> to come up with the details right now, but if you care you can look
> back in the pgsql-hackers archives to find the discussions where this
> behavior was agreed on.)
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: Finding the bin path
Next
From: "donniehan"
Date:
Subject: Re: Why grantor is owner in this case?