On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 06:28:32PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 05:27:19PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> David Fetter wrote:
>>>>> * Users who come from MySQL every once in a while, annoyed that
>>>>> we don't support "GRANT ... *" syntax.
>>>> I'm missing what's wrong with a wild-card GRANT syntax for this
>>> Without a major change in the way we do permissions, it will not
>>> work prospectively. We have no way ATM to store permissions for an
>>> object that does not currently exist.
>> There have been previous discussions of prospective permissions
>> changes. Are we restarting them here?
> It's not on the TODO list. I recall it being raised from time to time
> but I certainly don't recall a consensus that it should be done, nor
That was my recollection, too.
> so if you're implying that such a thing is a settled decision I
> suspect you're not entirely correct.
By no means.
> Of course, my memory has been known to have errors ...
Same with mine ;)
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: KaiGai Kohei||Date: 2009-06-28 23:32:29|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v8.5] Security checks on largeobjects|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2009-06-28 22:28:32|
|Subject: Re: pre-proposal: permissions made easier|