| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: add \dpS to psql |
| Date: | 2022-12-09 04:36:03 |
| Message-ID: | Y5K7MxuH7Bi+zU5V@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 09:15:03AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> The main idea behind this work is breaking out privileges into more
> granular pieces. If I want to create a role that only runs VACUUM on some
> tables on the weekend, why ѕhould I have to also give it the ability to
> ANALYZE, REFRESH, CLUSTER, and REINDEX? IMHO we should really let the user
> decide what set of privileges makes sense for their use-case. I'm unsure
> the grouping all these privileges together serves much purpose besides
> preserving ACL bits.
Hmm. I'd like to think that we should keep a frugal mind here. More
bits are now available, but it does not strike me as a good idea to
force their usage more than necessary, so grouping all these no-quite
DDL commands into the same bag does not sound that bad to me.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-12-09 05:19:00 | Re: [PATCH] Backport perl tests for pg_upgrade from 322becb60 |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-12-09 04:29:27 | Re: [PATCH] random_normal function |