Re: Regrading TODO item alerting pg_hba.conf from SQL

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de>, Gevik Babakhani <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Regrading TODO item alerting pg_hba.conf from SQL
Date: 2006-04-16 15:48:02
Message-ID: 17120.1145202482@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
>> there is actually no proof of the current order depency is really
>> a good idea. Other access lists work without that constraint.

> For something that may not be a good idea, it's awfully popular.

Didn't we have this entire discussion a month ago?

I don't think there would be any objection to adding a database-level
CONNECT privilege that's checked inside the database, *after* the
existing pg_hba.conf mechanism. That requires no new concepts: we
already have databases and privilege bits for them. If the default is
to grant CONNECT to PUBLIC then the behavior is backward-compatible, and
people can use the privilege, pg_hba.conf, or a combination to control
access. (Might be best to call it USAGE so we don't need to create a
new reserved word, but that's a minor detail.)

Eliminating pg_hba.conf altogether is a much harder sell, because you'd
have to prove that you're not giving up any functionality, and quite
frankly I don't think you can prove that. (Arguing that people don't
need the functionality you can't provide is not going to carry the day.)
In any case it would force a lot of relearning on DBAs, and there will
be push-back just because of that. I'm also not pleased with adding a
bunch of concepts that are not even part of the SQL world (eg, SSL,
Unix-domain connections) into GRANT.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-04-16 16:33:07 Re: Is full_page_writes=off safe in conjunction with
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-04-16 15:31:05 Re: Is full_page_writes=off safe in conjunction with