Re: Proposal: Change of pg_trigger.tg_enabled and adding

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Change of pg_trigger.tg_enabled and adding
Date: 2007-01-26 22:09:10
Message-ID: 29631.1169849350@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> On 1/26/2007 4:40 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> It would be nice if we had a separate role for replication services
>> so that we weren't exposing superuser so much.

> So you think about another flag in pg_shadow? Would work for me.

How exactly would such a role differ from a "regular" superuser? It
would still need an awful lot of privilege bypassing ability. I'm
pretty dubious that you could lock it down enough to make it worth the
trouble of supporting an additional concept.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message J. Andrew Rogers 2007-01-26 22:09:54 Re: PostgreSQL Data Loss
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-01-26 22:04:49 Re: Proposal: Change of pg_trigger.tg_enabled and adding