| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: predefined role(s) for VACUUM and ANALYZE |
| Date: | 2022-09-09 22:10:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20220909221004.GB2258997@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 04:15:23PM -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> Ok, now I'm a bit lost. If I want to use Nathan's feature to create a role to vacuum and analyze my database on a regular basis, how does per-relation granularity help me? If somebody creates a new table and doesn't grant those privileges to the role, doesn't that break the usage case? To me, per-relation granularity sounds useful, but orthogonal, to this feature.
I think there is room for both per-relation privileges and new predefined
roles. My latest patch set [0] introduces both.
[0] https://postgr.es/m/20220908055035.GA2100193%40nathanxps13
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-09-09 22:11:42 | Re: Avoid overhead with fprintf related functions |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-09-09 22:05:23 | Re: Switching XLog source from archive to streaming when primary available |