Re: Possible regression setting GUCs on \connect

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Possible regression setting GUCs on \connect
Date: 2023-05-18 18:33:16
Message-ID: 3868764.1684434796@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> This discussion made me go back and look at the commit in question. My
> opinion is that the feature as it was committed is quite hard to
> understand. The documentation for it said this: "Specifies that
> variable should be set on behalf of ordinary role." But what does that
> even mean? What's an "ordinary role"? What does "on behalf of" mean?

Yeah. And even more to the point: how would the feature interact with
per-user grants of SET privilege? It seems like it would have to ignore
or override that, which is not a conclusion I like at all.

I think that commit a0ffa885e pretty much nailed down the user interface
we want, and what remains is to work out how granting SET privilege
interacts with the time-delayed nature of ALTER USER/DATABASE SET.
But the answer to that does not seem difficult to me: remember who
issued the ALTER and see if they still have SET privilege at the time
we activate a particular entry.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2023-05-18 18:45:48 Re: Missing update of all_hasnulls in BRIN opclasses
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2023-05-18 18:26:14 Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction