Re: Users, Roles and Connection Pooling

From: Matt Andrews <mattandrews(at)massey(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Users, Roles and Connection Pooling
Date: 2019-10-02 09:41:13
Message-ID: CAPeDGQ5TjXO0EmPsZy9+y6d2Q9hx2usy_pxcVK6Uw8wk-NKb3Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

I have little experience in this area, but it seems like having a Postgres
role for every application user is the right way to do things. It’s just
that it also seems really inconvenient.

For example how to map an application’s users/people table to Postgres
roles? The pg_role name field is limited to 64 bytes, you can’t create a
foreign key to pg_role. What’s the answer? Use UUIDs as usernames or
something?

There’s very little out there on this topic, but surely this has been done
before.

On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 17:43, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> * Laurenz Albe (laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at) wrote:
> > A couple of pointers:
>
> I generally agree with these comments.
>
> > - This is a good setup if you don't have too many users. Metadata
> > queries will start getting slow if you get into the tens of thousands
> > of users, maybe earlier.
>
> While this seems plausible- I'd love to hear about exactly what you've
> seen start to be a problem when getting up to that many users. Are you
> just referring to things like \du? Or..?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
>
--
Matt Andrews

0400 990 131

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rob Sargent 2019-10-02 11:03:06 Re: Users, Roles and Connection Pooling
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2019-10-02 07:43:10 Re: Users, Roles and Connection Pooling