Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema

On 2013-05-13 12:59:47 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > I wrote:
> >> Another way to fix that inconsistency is to consider that
> >> allow_system_table_mods should gate table creations not just drops in
> >> pg_catalog. I'm not real sure why this wasn't the case all along ...
> >
> > Uh, scratch that last comment: actually, allow_system_table_mods *did*
> > gate that, in every existing release. I bitched upthread about the fact
> > that this was changed in 9.3, and did not hear any very satisfactory
> > defense of the change.
>
> It disallowed it only for tables, and not for any other object type.
> I found that completely arbitrary. It's perfectly obvious that people
> want to be able to create objects in pg_catalog; shall we adopt a rule
> that you can put extension there, as long as those extensions don't
> happen to contain tables? That is certainly confusing and arbitrary.

Why don't we just prohibit deletion/modification for anything below
FirstNormalObjectId instead of using the schema as a restriction? Then
we can allow creation for tables as well.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services