| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Lok P <loknath(dot)73(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Users and object privileges maintenance |
| Date: | 2024-02-18 19:26:51 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbgYyx2dm1R-fYijKGuXEP6LaGwnO6NQSbAR5YfHHQ-Zw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sun, Feb 18, 2024, 11:35 Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 4:33 PM Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
> wrote:
>
>> On 18.02.2024 17:40, Dominique Devienne wrote:
>>
>> Well, membership in a role mean you can "become that role", no?
>>
>>
Since v16, no. There is now a grant option that controls this capability.
Thus this seems logical,
>> and not confusing to me, that you can act as the owner, since you SET
>> ROLE to the owner.
>>
>> They may acts as the owner even without explicit SET ROLE to the owner.
>> It wasn't obvious to me when I came to postgres from oracle.
>>
>> Well, that depends on INHERIT on the ROLE, and since v16 on the
> membership GRANT, probably.
>
Prior to v16 only the attribute mattered. Since v16 only the membership
option matters.
David J.
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alec Lazarescu | 2024-02-18 22:20:07 | Re: Partitioning options |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2024-02-18 18:49:39 | Re: Function inserting into tstzrange ? (syntax error at or near...) |