| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Ron Snyder <snyder(at)roguewave(dot)com>, Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Open 7.3 items |
| Date: | 2002-08-14 19:04:35 |
| Message-ID: | 10639.1029351875@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> Appending '@template1' to unadorned usernames, and giving inherited rights
> across the installation to users with template1 rights? Then you have the
> unadorned 'lowen' becomes 'lowen(at)template1' -- but lowen(at)pari wouldn't have
> access to template1, right?
If not, standard things like "psql -l" won't work for lowen(at)pari(dot) I don't
think we can get away with a scheme that depends on disallowing access
to template1 for most people.
It should also be noted that the whole point of this little project was
to do something *simple* ... checking access to some other database to
decide what we will allow is getting a bit far afield from simple.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-14 19:05:40 | Re: Open 7.3 items |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-14 18:56:11 | Re: journaling in contrib ... |