On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 8:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Keith Fiske writes:
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Joe Conway writes:
> >>> Apparently INSERT and SELECT on the parent partitioned table skip
> normal
> >>> acl checks on the partitions. Is that intended behavior?
>
>
Keith Fiske writes:
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Joe Conway writes:
>>> Apparently INSERT and SELECT on the parent partitioned table skip normal
>>> acl checks on the partitions. Is that intended behavior?
>> Yes, this matches normal inheritance behavior.
> Should that
On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway writes:
> > Apparently INSERT and SELECT on the parent partitioned table skip normal
> > acl checks on the partitions. Is that intended behavior?
>
> Yes, this matches normal inheritance behavior.
>
> regards, t
Joe Conway writes:
> Apparently INSERT and SELECT on the parent partitioned table skip normal
> acl checks on the partitions. Is that intended behavior?
Yes, this matches normal inheritance behavior.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hacke
On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> Apparently INSERT and SELECT on the parent partitioned table skip normal
> acl checks on the partitions. Is that intended behavior?
>
> 8<---
> test=# create user part_test;
> CREATE ROLE
> test=#
> test=# create table t1
Apparently INSERT and SELECT on the parent partitioned table skip normal
acl checks on the partitions. Is that intended behavior?
8<---
test=# create user part_test;
CREATE ROLE
test=#
test=# create table t1 (id int) partition by range ((id % 4));
CREATE TABLE
test=# create
