Re: allowing for control over SET ROLE

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: allowing for control over SET ROLE
Date: 2022-11-18 17:50:56
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZQJBv74F_eXTcooq2dh7MBn1EdFOJvFf2dm_cneYsWog@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 7:24 PM Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> But I'm fine if you'd like to move on with the SET ROLE privilege
> instead, as long as we believe it grants a stable set of capabilities
> (and conversely, that if the SET ROLE privilege is revoked, that it
> revokes a stable set of capabilities).

OK.

Here's a rebased v3 to see what cfbot thinks.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
v3-0001-Add-a-SET-option-to-the-GRANT-command.patch application/octet-stream 52.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-11-18 18:26:56 Re: Allow single table VACUUM in transaction block
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-11-18 17:32:10 Re: Avoid double lookup in pgstat_fetch_stat_tabentry()