Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Gevik Babakhani <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"
Date: 2006-04-26 18:13:57
Message-ID: 200604261813.k3QIDvo26076@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > we need
> > to redesign the permission system to allow for more permission bits
> > because otherwise we'll run out soon.
>
> Only if we keep inventing separate privileges for things as specific
> as TRUNCATE. I was just about to raise this point as a possible reason
> why not to invent a separate TRUNCATE bit. (There are other problems,
> eg both 't' and 'T' letters are already taken.)
>
> The question that really ought to be answered before doing any of this
> is why DELETE privilege shouldn't be sufficient to allow TRUNCATE.

TODO has:

* %Add a separate TRUNCATE permission

Currently only the owner can TRUNCATE a table because triggers are not
called, and the table is locked in exclusive mode.

--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-04-26 18:19:03 Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2006-04-26 18:06:32 Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"