| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL |
| Date: | 2015-03-04 00:38:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20150304003834.GI29780@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim,
* Jim Nasby (Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com) wrote:
> On 3/3/15 5:22 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >The
> >problem with the role attribute approach is that they aren't inheirted
> >the way GRANTs are, which means you can't have a "backup" role that is
> >then granted out to users, you'd have to set a "BACKUP" role attribute
> >for every role added.
>
> Yeah, but you'd still have to grant "backup" to every role created
> anyway, right?
Yes, you would.
> Or you could create a role that has the backup attribute and then
> grant that to users. Then they'd have to intentionally SET ROLE
> my_backup_role to elevate their privilege. That seems like a safer
> way to do things...
This is already possible with the GRANT system- create a 'noinherit'
role instead of an 'inherit' role. I agree it's safer to require a
'SET ROLE' and configure all of my systems with a noinherit 'admin'
role.
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-03-04 00:47:14 | Re: Parallel Seq Scan |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-03-04 00:37:22 | Re: NULL-pointer check and incorrect comment for pstate in addRangeTableEntry |