| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL |
| Date: | 2015-03-05 02:28:28 |
| Message-ID: | 54F7BF4C.6010002@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/3/15 5:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> For my part, I understood that we specifically didn't want to allow that
> for the same reason that we didn't want to simply depend on the GRANT
> system for the above functions, but everyone else on these discussions
> so far is advocating for using the GRANT system. My memory might be
> wrong, but I could have sworn that I had brought up exactly that
> suggestion in years past only to have it shot down.
I think a lot of this access control work is done based on some
undocumented understandings, when in fact there is no consensus on
anything. I think we need more clarity.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2015-03-05 02:34:26 | Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2015-03-05 02:24:30 | Re: Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL |