| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review |
| Date: | 2016-01-18 02:13:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20160118021305.GI3685@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Bruce Momjian (bruce(at)momjian(dot)us) wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 06:58:25PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I'm not against that idea, though I continue to feel that there are
> > common sets of privileges which backup tools could leverage.
> >
> > The other issue that I'm running into, again, while considering how to
> > move back to ACL-based permissions for these objects is that we can't
> > grant out the actual permissions which currently exist. That means we
>
> Is that because many of them are complex, e.g. you can kill only your
> own sessions?
Right.
> > either need to break backwards compatibility, which would be pretty
> > ugly, in my view, or come up with new functions and then users will have
> > to know which functions to use when.
> >
> > As I don't think we really want to break backwards compatibility or
> > remove existing functionality, the only approach which is going to make
> > sense is to add additional functions in some cases. In particular, we
> > will need alternate versions of pg_terminate_backend and
> > pg_cancel_backend. One thought I had was to make that
>
> Like these? Could we define own-user-type rights?
Interesting idea but I don't really see that being general enough that
we would want to burn a GRANT bit for it...
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2016-01-18 02:15:24 | Re: pgsql: Further tweaking of print_aligned_vertical(). |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-01-18 02:10:23 | Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review |