Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option
Date: 2022-06-13 18:42:28
Message-ID: CAKFQuwa5YxEHqv-xu4__A5fv=+aL59vZquYjFiahudwT6pfsuw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 11:01 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Some
>
syntax would be a bit different on the new releases and that would
> unlock some new options we don't currently have, but there's no
> behavior that you can get today which you wouldn't be able to get any
> more under this proposal.
>

Agreed. Moving the inherit flag to the many-to-many join relation provides
flexibility, while representing the present behavior is trivial - every row
for a given member role has the same value for said flag.

One seemingly missing feature is to specify for a role that its privileges
cannot be inherited. In this case associations where it is the group role
mustn't be flagged inherit. Symmetrically, "inherit only" seems like a
plausible option for pre-defined group roles.

I agree that granting membership makes the pg_auth_members record appear
and revoking membership makes it disappear.

I dislike having GRANT do stuff when membership is already established.

ALTER MEMBER role IN group ALTER [SET | ASSUME] [TO | =] [TRUE | FALSE]

David J.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-06-13 19:34:31 Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option
Previous Message Robert Haas 2022-06-13 18:20:18 Re: better page-level checksums