Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 10:52 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> 1) ALTER SCHEMA SET DEFAULT PRIVILEGES statements which sets default
>> permissions, by ROLE and object type, on new objects.
>> 2) a statement to set privs on all existing objects by type and role
>> within a schema.
> I don't see why either of these things should be properties of the
> schema. It seems to make much more sense for these defaults to be a
> property of the user who creates the objects.
That seems fairly backwards to me. I agree that tying it to schemas
is a bit less flexible than one could wish, but that doesn't make
attaching it to the user the right thing.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-06-29 18:40:31|
|Subject: Re: Query progress indication - an implementation |
|Previous:||From: Joshua Tolley||Date: 2009-06-29 18:33:59|
|Subject: Re: Query progress indication - an implementation|