| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema |
| Date: | 2013-05-13 17:40:57 |
| Message-ID: | 7408.1368466857@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> 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.
> We currently do, but that led to problems with $SUBJECT.
AFAIR there are no code restrictions based on OID value. We've got
restrictions based on things being in pg_catalog or not, and we've got
restrictions based on things being marked pinned in pg_depend.
Looking at the OID range might be a reasonable proxy for pinned-ness,
though, and it would certainly be a lot cheaper than a lookup in
pg_depend.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-05-13 17:50:32 | Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2013-05-13 17:32:24 | Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema |