From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: fix and document CLUSTER privileges |
Date: | 2022-12-14 17:34:35 |
Message-ID: | 20221214173435.GA690225@nathanxps13 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 04:08:40PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 1:13 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Currently, CLUSTER, REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, and REINDEX (minus REINDEX
>> SCHEMA|DATABASE|SYSTEM) require ownership of the relation or superuser. In
>> fact, all three use the same RangeVarCallbackOwnsTable() callback function.
>> My current thinking is that this is good enough. I don't sense any strong
>> demand for allowing database owners to run these commands on all non-shared
>> relations, and there's ongoing work to break out the privileges to GRANT
>> and predefined roles.
>
> +1.
>
> I don't see why being the database owner should give you the right to
> run a random subset of commands on any table in the database. Tables
> have their own system for access privileges; we should use that, or
> extend it as required.
Here is a rebased version of the patch.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
fix_cluster_privs_v2.patch | text/x-diff | 2.0 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-12-14 17:35:52 | Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2022-12-14 17:25:17 | Re: Amcheck verification of GiST and GIN |