Re: predefined role(s) for VACUUM and ANALYZE

On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 11:24:18AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 11:11 AM Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>> If we were to make the specific bits depend on the object type as I'm
>> suggesting, then we'd have 8 bits used for relations (10 with the vacuum
>> and analyze bits), leaving us with 6 remaining inside the existing
>> uint32, or more bits available than we've ever used since the original
>> implementation from what I can tell, or at least 15+ years. That seems
>> like pretty darn good future-proofing without a lot of complication or
>> any change in physical size. We would also be able to get rid of the
>> question of "well, is it more valuable to add the ability to GRANT
>> TRUNCATE on a relation, or GRANT CONNECT on databases" or other rather
>> odd debates between ultimately very different things.
>
> I mostly agree with this. I don't think it's entirely clear how we
> should try to get more bits going forward, but it's clear that we
> cannot just forever hold our breath and refuse to find any more bits.
> And of the possible ways of doing it, this seems like the one with the
> lowest impact, so I think it likely makes sense to do this one first.

+1. My earlier note wasn't intended to suggest that one approach was
better than the other, merely that there are a couple of options to choose
from once we run out of bits. I don't think this work needs to be tied to
the VACUUM/ANALYZE stuff, but I am interested in it and hope to take it on
at some point.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com