On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 10:51:51AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 10:29:39AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah, I do not think it follows that being table owner should >> entitle you to such low-level access. I'm inclined to reject >> this proposal. > > -1 here, too. IMHO all of pageinspect should remain superuser-only since > it is meant for development/debugging. The proposal doesn't describe a > use-case for the relaxed privileges, either.
Same. We've always wanted this module to be superuser-only, with superuser hardcoded checks and not even execution ACLs. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
