Louis Battuello <[email protected]> writes:
>> The point is you can't resolve a name like "schema_1.something" unless
>> you have USAGE on schema_1. So the RI-checking query, which is run as
>> the owner of the table, fails at parse time.
> That certainly makes sense for user_2 that owns the reference table and is
> blocked by not having usage on the reference table’s schema.
> But, user_1 owns both schemas and has usage on both but no longer owns the
> reference table in one schema. Why is user_1’s insert on the referencing
> table failing? Is the validation of the FK no longer done as user_1?
Exactly, it's done as the owner of the referencing table. (I don't recall
whether that's uniformly true for all types of FK-enforcement queries,
but evidently it's true for this case.)
regards, tom lane
