Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT.
Date
Msg-id 20211026200255.GO20998@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT.  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Responses Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT.
List pgsql-hackers
Greetings,

* Jeff Davis (pgsql@j-davis.com) wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-10-26 at 00:07 +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> > It feels a bit excessive to introduce a new predefined role just for
> > this.  Perhaps this could be accomplished with a new function that
> > could be granted.
>
> It would be nice if the syntax could be used, since it's pretty
> widespread. I guess it does feel excessive to have its own predefined
> role, but at the same time it's hard to group a command like CHECKPOINT
> into a category. Maybe if we named it something like pg_performance or
> something we could make a larger group?

For the use-case presented, I don't really buy off on this argument.
We're talking about benchmarking tools, surely they can be and likely
already are updated with some regularity for new major versions of PG.
I wonder also if there aren't other things besides this that would need
to be changed for them to work as a non-superuser anyway too, meaning
this would be just one change among others that they'd need to make.

In this specific case, I'd be more inclined to provide a function rather
than an explicit predefined role for this one thing.

Thanks,

Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption
Next
From: "Jonathan S. Katz"
Date:
Subject: Re: allowing "map" for password auth methods with clientcert=verify-full