On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 11:13:40AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Julien Rouhaud <rjuju...@gmail.com> writes: >> However +1 for the patch, as it seems more consistent to always get a >> permission failure if you're not a superuser. > > Yeah, it's just weird if such a check is not the first thing > in the function. Even if you can convince yourself that the > actions taken before that don't create any security issue today, > it's not hard to imagine that innocent future code rearrangements > could break that argument. What's the value of postponing the > check anyway?
Thanks for the input, I have applied the patch. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
