Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Gevik Babakhani <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"
Date: 2006-04-26 18:13:57
Message-ID: 200604261813.k3QIDvo26076@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > we need
> > to redesign the permission system to allow for more permission bits
> > because otherwise we'll run out soon.
> 
> Only if we keep inventing separate privileges for things as specific
> as TRUNCATE.  I was just about to raise this point as a possible reason
> why not to invent a separate TRUNCATE bit.  (There are other problems,
> eg both 't' and 'T' letters are already taken.)
> 
> The question that really ought to be answered before doing any of this
> is why DELETE privilege shouldn't be sufficient to allow TRUNCATE.

TODO has:

	* %Add a separate TRUNCATE permission
	
	  Currently only the owner can TRUNCATE a table because triggers are not
	  called, and the table is locked in exclusive mode.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2006-04-26 18:19:03
Subject: Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"
Previous:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2006-04-26 18:06:32
Subject: Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group