Re: [PATCH] DefaultACLs

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Petr Jelinek <pjmodos(at)pjmodos(dot)net> writes:
>> because it seems like merging privileges seems to be acceptable for most
>> (although I am not sure I like it, but I don't have better solution for
>> managing conflicts), I changed the patch to do just that.
>
> It's not clear to me whether we have consensus on this approach.
> Last chance for objections, anyone?
>
> The main argument I can see against doing it this way is that it doesn't
> provide a means for overriding the hard-wired public grants for object
> types that have such (principally functions).  I think that a reasonable
> way to address that issue would be for a follow-on patch that allows
> changing the hard-wired default privileges for object types.  It might
> well be that no one cares enough for it to matter, though.  I think that
> in most simple cases what's needed is a way to add privileges, not
> subtract them --- and we're already agreed that this mechanism is only
> meant to simplify simple cases.

I'm going to reiterate what I suggested upthread... let's let the
default, global default ACL contain the hard-wired privileges, instead
of making them hardwired. Then your objects will get those privileges
not because they are hard-wired, but because you haven't changed your
global default ACL to not contain them.

...Robert