| From: | Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: NO-CREATE-TABLE and NO-LOCK-TABLE |
| Date: | 2000-06-12 16:12:39 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.3.96.1000612180113.16565B-100000@ara.zf.jcu.cz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
> >
> > We already tell about it, but yes, you are right too. But it is not
> > implemented yet.
> >
>
> I am inclined to think it helps to have this configurable at the user
> level too, but let's see what people come up with.
Yes, I too, but it is the good theme for flame-war, all can have right.
For example user that is used for web-server connection needs only
small privilage (SELECT) and why for _all_ tables run GRANT if I can set it
as global option.
I very expect new ACL, because I'm admin for large DB with critical data
and with more sub-admins and users and groups (..etc.) and I need good
tools for user restriction/control.
And implement all oneself via triggers (columns privilage) is very
difficult.
Karel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Denis Perchine | 2000-06-12 16:28:23 | Caching number of blocks in relation to avoi lseek. |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-06-12 16:11:15 | Re: BeOS Diff Take 3 |