Re: Proposal: two new role attributes and/or capabilities? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From José Luis Tallón
Subject Re: Proposal: two new role attributes and/or capabilities?
Date
Msg-id 5499BBC2.9030705@adv-solutions.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal: two new role attributes and/or capabilities?  (David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Proposal: two new role attributes and/or capabilities?  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/23/2014 07:01 PM, David G Johnston wrote:<br /></div><blockquote
cite="mid:1419357715258-5831868.post@n5.nabble.com"type="cite"><pre wrap="">[snip]
 
So you want to say:

GRANT IMPERSONATE TO bouncer; --covers the "ALL" requirement

instead of

GRANT victim1 TO bouncer;
GRANT victim2 TO bouncer;
etc...

-- these would still be used to cover the "limited users" requirement
?</pre></blockquote><br /><code>GRANT IMPERSONATE ON actual_role TO login_role</code><br /><br />     would actually
getus closer to how some other databases do, now that I think of it. This could be just some syntactic sugar.<br />    
Mightdefinitively ease migrations, if nothing else.<br /><br /><br /> I appreciate the feedback. Thanks!<br /><br /><br
/>    / J.L.<br /><br /> 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andreas Karlsson
Date:
Subject: Re: Reducing lock strength of adding foreign keys
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: two new role attributes and/or capabilities?