[BUGS] BUG #5457: dblink_connect now restricts non-superusers to password

2010-05-11 Thread Chana Slutzkin
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 5457 Logged by: Chana Slutzkin Email address: ch...@cs.huji.ac.il PostgreSQL version: 8.4 Operating system: FreeBSD 7.2 Description:dblink_connect now restricts non-superusers to password Details: dblink in ve

[BUGS] BUG #5458: Permission check is skipped by inheritance

2010-05-11 Thread Takahiro Itagaki
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 5458 Logged by: Takahiro Itagaki Email address: itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp PostgreSQL version: 9.0beta1 Operating system: Linux (maybe ALL) Description:Permission check is skipped by inheritance Details: E

[BUGS] Re: BUG #5457: dblink_connect now restricts non-superusers to password

2010-05-11 Thread Jasen Betts
On 2010-05-11, Chana Slutzkin wrote: > > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference: 5457 > Logged by: Chana Slutzkin > Email address: ch...@cs.huji.ac.il > PostgreSQL version: 8.4 > Operating system: FreeBSD 7.2 > Description:dblink_connect now restri

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5457: dblink_connect now restricts non-superusers to password

2010-05-11 Thread Bruce Momjian
Chana Slutzkin wrote: > > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference: 5457 > Logged by: Chana Slutzkin > Email address: ch...@cs.huji.ac.il > PostgreSQL version: 8.4 > Operating system: FreeBSD 7.2 > Description:dblink_connect now restricts non-superu

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5458: Permission check is skipped by inheritance

2010-05-11 Thread Tom Lane
"Takahiro Itagaki" writes: > Even if a non-superuser who has no permissions on > a parent and a child tables, he can retrieve data > from the parent when the two tables have inheritance > relationship. Hmm, the change to not check child permissions is intentional, but it looks like Peter overdid

Re: [BUGS] bool: symbol name collision

2010-05-11 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On mån, 2010-05-10 at 15:55 +, Bryan Henderson wrote: > >>> I don't know how concrete you want. > > > >Something one can download and compile. > > That wouldn't be worth anyone's effort, since the problem is esaily > enough elucidated with a few words of explanation. I.e. I'm sure you > can i

Re: [BUGS] bool: symbol name collision

2010-05-11 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On mån, 2010-05-10 at 15:55 +, Bryan Henderson wrote: >> >>> I don't know how concrete you want. >> > >> >Something one can download and compile. >> >> That wouldn't be worth anyone's effort, since the problem is esaily >> enough eluci

Re: [BUGS] bool: symbol name collision

2010-05-11 Thread Alex Hunsaker
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:42, Robert Haas wrote: > I guess the question that comes to mind for me is how many other > things fall into this category.  We define a lot of symbols like int4 > and int32 that other people could also have defined, and I don't > really want to s/^/pg/ all of them.  If

Re: [BUGS] bool: symbol name collision

2010-05-11 Thread Tom Lane
Alex Hunsaker writes: > On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:42, Robert Haas wrote: >> I guess the question that comes to mind for me is how many other >> things fall into this category.  We define a lot of symbols like int4 >> and int32 that other people could also have defined, and I don't >> really wan

Re: [BUGS] bool: symbol name collision

2010-05-11 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tis, 2010-05-11 at 14:42 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > I guess the question that comes to mind for me is how many other > things fall into this category. We define a lot of symbols like int4 > and int32 that other people could also have defined, and I don't > really want to s/^/pg/ all of them.

Re: [BUGS] bool: symbol name collision

2010-05-11 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Alex Hunsaker writes: >> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:42, Robert Haas wrote: >>> I guess the question that comes to mind for me is how many other >>> things fall into this category.  We define a lot of symbols like int4 >>> and int32 that other pe

[BUGS] BUG #5459: Unable to cancel query while in send()

2010-05-11 Thread Mason Hale
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 5459 Logged by: Mason Hale Email address: ma...@onespot.com PostgreSQL version: 8.3.8 Operating system: Redhat EL 5.1-64 bit Description:Unable to cancel query while in send() Details: ISSUE: unable to cancel

Re: [BUGS] bool: symbol name collision

2010-05-11 Thread Bryan Henderson
>On the flip side if the code that purports to cope with other >definitions of bool is useless, we should remove it so as to avoid >giving the impression that we have any ability to so cope. Indeed, that code is what led me to believe I could work around my bool conflict problem with a "#define bo

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5459: Unable to cancel query while in send()

2010-05-11 Thread Tom Lane
"Mason Hale" writes: > ISSUE: unable to cancel queries using pg_cancel_backend(), that are in > send() function call, waiting on client receipt of data. I think what you are describing is a kernel bug. There's not a lot we can do about it if the send() call hangs. Considering the kernel already

Re: [BUGS] bool: symbol name collision

2010-05-11 Thread Bryan Henderson
>Yeah, that may well be. I don't think we should have a policy of >folding our arms and shouting "no" whenever someone asks us to clean >up our namespace, but on the flip side one request (or even two) is >probably not enough reason to do anything drastic, and this would be >fairly drastic. How a