It made me happy to see the pg_get_acl() function that I was involved in adding, is appreciated by users. I think there is still much improvement in the space o

It made me happy to see the pg_get_acl() function that I was involved in adding, is appreciated by users. I think there is still much improvement in the space of querying privileges. I think most users would probably struggle to come up with the query from the article: postgres=# SELECT (pg_identify_object(s.classid,s.objid,s.objsubid)).*, pg_catalog.pg_get_acl(s.classid,s.objid,s.objsubid) AS acl FROM pg_catalog.pg_shdepend AS s JOIN pg_catalog.pg_database AS d ON d.datname = current_database() AND d.oid = s.dbid JOIN pg_catalog.pg_authid AS a ON a.oid = s.refobjid AND s.refclassid = 'pg_authid'::regclass WHERE s.deptype = 'a'; -[ RECORD 1 ]----------------------------------------- type | table schema | public name | testtab identity | public.testtab acl | {postgres=arwdDxtm/postgres,foo=r/postgres} What I wanted to really add, was two new system views, pg_ownerships and pg_privileges [1]. The pg_get_acl() was a dependency that we needed to get in place first. In the end, I withdrew the patch trying to add these views. If there is enough interest from users, I might consider picking up the task of trying to work out the remaining obstacles. Do people here need pg_ownerships and/or pg_privileges? [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/bbe7d1cb-0435-4ee6-a9f5-7dbc79ab84b2%40app.fastmail.com https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/bbe7d1cb-0435-4ee...