Re: dropping a user causes pain (#2)
It occurred to me after I wrote that functions with 'security definer'
would present a problem with any default owner changing scheme. I like the
mass reassignment suggestion.
andrew
Chris wrote:
Ah OK, I must have been thinking of the database owner check. I'd vote
for (1) checking that they own no objects and by default owning all
their stuff to the database owner. Plus add an optional clause:DROP USER foo OWNER TO bob;
Chris
The docs (new and old) explicitly state you can do this; see for
example http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/static/sql-dropuser.html
[snip]
Show quoted text
But ISTM that in such a case the user's objects should possibly be
reassigned to the database owner (who can't be dropped), in kinda the
same way that a *nix process that is orphaned is reparented to init. I
guess that might break other things, or would it?Or maybe we need 'drop user foo with cascade'.
Import Notes
Reply to msg id not found: 169501c35fb4e4a6e2402800a8c0@marsReference msg id not found: 169501c35fb4e4a6e2402800a8c0@mars