Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review
Date
Msg-id 20160118011157.GA31313@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 06:58:25PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I'm not against that idea, though I continue to feel that there are
> common sets of privileges which backup tools could leverage.
> 
> The other issue that I'm running into, again, while considering how to
> move back to ACL-based permissions for these objects is that we can't
> grant out the actual permissions which currently exist.  That means we

Is that because many of them are complex, e.g. you can kill only your
own sessions?

> either need to break backwards compatibility, which would be pretty
> ugly, in my view, or come up with new functions and then users will have
> to know which functions to use when.
> 
> As I don't think we really want to break backwards compatibility or
> remove existing functionality, the only approach which is going to make
> sense is to add additional functions in some cases.  In particular, we
> will need alternate versions of pg_terminate_backend and
> pg_cancel_backend.  One thought I had was to make that

Like these?  Could we define own-user-type rights?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Roman grave inscription                             +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions