Dear Tom,
I'm sorry to bother you. i really care about this behavior, but i couldn't find the discussions you mentioned in pgsql-hackers archives.
Would you please tell me more about the discussions(about date? the related issue?), so that i can search it and find it more easily?
Thank you very much !
Regards
-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
>
