Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54DDA6330C8 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:29:49 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 87303-05 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:29:38 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from exprod7og107.obsmtp.com (exprod7og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.167]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 78596632F93 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:29:43 -0300 (ADT) Received: from source ([209.85.128.189]) by exprod7ob107.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSenVxccmK7AGWNqt6mLTmDeTernu2HCL@postini.com; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 06:29:43 PDT Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 18so708883fkq.15 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 06:29:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.103.229.12 with SMTP id g12mr2004906mur.16.1240061380935; Sat, 18 Apr 2009 06:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?85.77.211.98? (YKMMDCCXCVII.gprs.sl-laajakaista.fi [85.77.211.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 12sm8551198muq.5.2009.04.18.06.29.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 18 Apr 2009 06:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <49E9D5B6.9050406@enterprisedb.com> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 16:29:26 +0300 From: Heikki Linnakangas Organization: EnterpriseDB User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane CC: KaiGai Kohei , KaiGai Kohei , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] unalias of ACL_SELECT_FOR_UPDATE References: <49E809F6.8070008@ak.jp.nec.com> <49E8133A.7090601@enterprisedb.com> <49E81EA1.2060202@ak.jp.nec.com> <20069.1239977115@sss.pgh.pa.us> <49E91AE4.9020404@kaigai.gr.jp> <49E974AD.3020602@enterprisedb.com> <13982.1240056219@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <13982.1240056219@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200904/974 X-Sequence-Number: 137077 Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas writes: >> That way you could >> grant SELECT_FOR_SHARE permission on a table to let people insert rows >> into other tables that have a foreign key reference to it, without >> having to grant UPDATE permission. > > ... but this argument for it is utter nonsense. FKs are not a > permissions problem, because the triggers run as the table's owner. > The only permission you need is REFERENCES: Then I think we should leave it as it is. I don't see any plausible use case for a separate SELECT FOR SHARE or UPDATE permission. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com