From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: shihao zhong <zhong950419@gmail.com>
cc: imchifan@163.com, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
        pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #19703: information_schema.usage_privileges omits a sequence
 owner's implicit USAGE privilege
In-reply-to: 
 <CAGRkXqTssJ5ttoY_BATULMChBHQAAyO3sPNBMXGnCOws3ANRQQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <19703-49d6f1796001a6d7@postgresql.org>
 <362684.1789919385@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAGRkXqTssJ5ttoY_BATULMChBHQAAyO3sPNBMXGnCOws3ANRQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to shihao zhong <zhong950419@gmail.com>
	message dated "Sun, 20 Sep 2026 14:33:09 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <546232.1789931913.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 15:18:33 -0400
Message-ID: <546233.1789931913@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/546233.1789931913%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

shihao zhong <zhong950419@gmail.com> writes:
> This may needs a catversion bump and backport to 14.
> The older version requires manual drop and recreate the view.

In principle we don't need a catversion bump here, since there's
no C-code-versus-catalogs compatibility issue.  But we have usually
done one for information_schema changes.

I think I'd vote against back-patching.  The fact that this went
unnoticed for 14 years demonstrates what low impact it has.
I don't foresee people wanting to manually replace that view in
order to fix it in existing installations.

			regards, tom lane