| From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Should SET ROLE inherit config params? |
| Date: | 2009-03-13 03:43:36 |
| Message-ID: | 200903122343.37053.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thursday 12 March 2009 21:39:54 Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Josh, this isn't a rejection. Both Tom and I asked for more exploration
> > of the implications of doing as you suggest. Tom has been more helpful
> > than I was in providing some scenarios that would cause problems. It is
> > up to you to solve the problems, which is often possible.
>
> OK, well, barring the context issues, what do people think of the idea?
>
> What I was thinking was that this would be a setting on the SET ROLE
> statement, such as:
>
> SET ROLE special WITH SETTINGS
>
> ... or similar; I'd need to find an existing keyword which works.
>
> I think this bypasses a lot of the issues which Tom raises, but I'd want
> to think about the various permutations some more.
>
How bad of an idea would it be to split set session authorization to be
privilege specific, and set role to focus on configiuration?
--
Robert Treat
Conjecture: http://www.xzilla.net
Consulting: http://www.omniti.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-03-13 05:49:44 | Re: how to trace the pgsql text format protocol [implementing driver] |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2009-03-13 01:56:29 | Re: Out parameters handling |