From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Clark C(dot) Evans" <cce(at)clarkevans(dot)com> |
Cc: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: GRANT role_name TO role_name ON database_name |
Date: | 2013-05-29 14:08:30 |
Message-ID: | 20130529140830.GB6434@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Clark,
* Clark C. Evans (cce(at)clarkevans(dot)com) wrote:
> I apologize for posting to -hackers; it was probably the wrong list.
I don't know about that.. It's a new feature request, not sure where
else you'd email about it.
That said, it's also a non-trivial thing to change and it would have to
be done in a way that doesn't break things for people who expect the
current behavior, and I don't immediately see an easy way to do that.
This capability might well come with a real way to have per-database
roles in general, which has been asked for quite often as well. You
would then be able to have an 'auditor' role in each database and have
them actually be different roles- would that match your needs..?
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-05-29 14:12:54 | Re: fallocate / posix_fallocate for new WAL file creation (etc...) |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-05-29 13:58:46 | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze |