Fujii-san,
Thanks for taking a look.
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:29 AM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:15 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I tend to agree that TRUNCATE's permission model for inheritance
> > should be consistent with that for the other commands. How about the
> > attached patch toward that end?
>
> Thanks for the patch!
>
> The patch basically looks good to me.
>
> +GRANT SELECT (f1, fz), UPDATE (fz) ON atestc TO regress_priv_user2;
> +REVOKE TRUNCATE ON atestc FROM regress_priv_user2;
>
> These seem not to be necessary for the test.
You're right. Removed in the attached updated patch.
> BTW, I found that LOCK TABLE on the parent table checks the permission
> of its child tables. This also needs to be fixed (as a separate patch)?
Commit ac33c7e2c13 and a past discussion ([1], [2], resp.) appear to
disagree with that position, but I would like to agree with you
because the behavior you suggest would be consistent with other
commands. So, I'm attaching a patch for that too, although it would
be better to hear more opinions before accepting it.
Thanks,
Amit
[1] https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=ac33c7e2c13
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/34d269d40905121340h535ef652kbf8f054811e42e39%40mail.gmail.com