MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <11650.1357782995@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: 
 <CAB8KJ=g317u8GVyoi+E8cByOGVa+iNVsriTgC+XFA-k2wqpCTA@mail.gmail.com>
	<11650.1357782995@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 12:49:32 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAFmVg3ietJ_drX2QgTVX3Ba6bMpbBErx0YJ+DEEztF6hWC-_DA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Privileges for INFORMATION_SCHEMA.SCHEMATA (was Re: Small
	clarification in "34.41. schemata")
From: Casey Allen Shobe <casey@shobe.info>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015173ff110877a1904d34344b3
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org

--0015173ff110877a1904d34344b3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> However, it seems to me that this behavior is actually wrong for our
> purposes, as it represents a too-literal reading of the spec.  The SQL
> standard has no concept of privileges on schemas, only ownership.
> We do have privileges on schemas, so it seems to me that the consistent
> thing would be for this view to show any schema that you either own or
> have some privilege on.


IMHO, schemata should follow the standard as it does today.  Other
platforms have privileges on schemas as well, and this sort of thing seems
to fall into the same bucket as other platform compatibilities outside the
scope of what the standard thinks about, which means you use pg_catalog to
access that information rather than information_schema, which should be
expected to work consistently on all platforms that implement it.

-- 
Casey Allen Shobe
casey@shobe.info

--0015173ff110877a1904d34344b3
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Tom Lane <span d=
ir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us" target=3D"_blank">tgl@s=
ss.pgh.pa.us</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style=3D"BORDER-LEFT:#ccc 1px solid;MARGIN:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;PA=
DDING-LEFT:1ex" class=3D"gmail_quote">However, it seems to me that this beh=
avior is actually wrong for our<br>purposes, as it represents a too-literal=
 reading of the spec. =C2=A0The SQL<br>
standard has no concept of privileges on schemas, only ownership.<br>We do =
have privileges on schemas, so it seems to me that the consistent<br>thing =
would be for this view to show any schema that you either own or<br>have so=
me privilege on.</blockquote>

<div>=C2=A0</div>
<div>IMHO, schemata should follow the standard as it does today.=C2=A0 Othe=
r platforms have privileges on schemas as well, and this sort of thing seem=
s to fall into the same bucket as other platform compatibilities outside th=
e scope of what the standard thinks about, which means you use pg_catalog t=
o access that information rather than information_schema, which should be e=
xpected to work consistently on all platforms that implement it.</div>

<div>=C2=A0</div></div>-- <br>Casey Allen Shobe<br><a href=3D"mailto:casey@=
shobe.info">casey@shobe.info</a><br><br><br>

--0015173ff110877a1904d34344b3--