From: Dian Fay <dian.m.fay@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: docs: note ownership requirement for refreshing materialized views
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:36:29 -0400
Message-ID: <b942866a-cdd7-c51e-11c2-3edd875fad5c@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13833.1534392450@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <745abbd2-a1a0-ead8-2cb2-768c16747d97@gmail.com>
<20180816010355.GH3681@paquier.xyz>
<a1ccf5bd-f69c-6b73-77a0-6b6e719e01de@gmail.com>
<13833.1534392450@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Fair enough! Here's a new version.
On 8/16/18 12:07 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dian Fay <dian.m.fay@gmail.com> writes:
>> I feel resorting to the infinitive asks more involvement of the reader,
>> while leading with the responsible role(s) helps shortcut the process of
>> determining whether what follows is relevant. Efficiency is always a
>> virtue, although this is admittedly more than a little academic for a
>> one-sentence addition!
> I think Michael's point is that this formulation is unlike what we have
> elsewhere for similar statements. Looking around, it seems like the
> typical phraseology would be more like
>
> "You must own the materialized view to use REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW."
>
> It is not really customary to call out the superuser exception
> explicitly, because if we did, we'd be mentioning superusers in every
> other sentence. The point is covered by existing documentation that
> says something to the effect of superusers bypassing all permissions
> checks; and I think there's also a statement somewhere about superusers
> implicitly being members of every role, which is a different way of
> arriving at the same conclusion.
>
> In any case, it's definitely an oversight that the REFRESH reference
> page fails to address permissions at all. +1 for adding something.
>
> regards, tom lane
Attachments:0001-docs-note-ownership-requirement-for-refreshing-mater.patch (text/x-patch, 581B) downloaddiff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/refresh_materialized_view.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/refresh_materialized_view.sgmlindex 9cf01a25a5..f001a661e1 100644--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/refresh_materialized_view.sgml+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/refresh_materialized_view.sgml@@ -91,6 +91,10 @@ REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW [ CONCURRENTLY ] <replaceable class="parameter">name</
<refsect1>
<title>Notes</title>
+ <para>+ You must own the materialized view in order to use REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW.+ </para>+
<para>
While the default index for future
<xref linkend="sql-cluster"/>
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: dian.m.fay@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, michael@paquier.xyz, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: docs: note ownership requirement for refreshing materialized views
In-Reply-To: <b942866a-cdd7-c51e-11c2-3edd875fad5c@gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox