Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review

On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:32 AM, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 29 January 2016 at 22:41, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Michael,
>>>
>>> * Michael Paquier (michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:37 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > > * Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
>>> > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >> > Personally, I don't have any particular issue having both, but the
>>> > >> > desire was stated that it would be better to have the regular
>>> > >> > GRANT EXECUTE ON catalog_func() working before we consider having
>>> > >> > default roles for same. That moves the goal posts awful far
>>> > >> > though, if
>>> > >> > we're to stick with that and consider how we might extend the GRANT
>>> > >> > system in the future.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I don't think it moves the goal posts all that far. Convincing
>>> > >> pg_dump to dump grants on system functions shouldn't be a crazy large
>>> > >> patch.
>>> > >
>>> > > I wasn't clear as to what I was referring to here. I've already
>>> > > written
>>> > > a patch to pg_dump to support grants on system objects and agree that
>>> > > it's at least reasonable.
>>> >
>>> > Is it already posted somewhere? I don't recall seeing it. Robert and
>>> > Noah
>>> > have a point that this would be useful for users who would like to dump
>>> > GRANT/REVOKE rights on system functions & all, using a new option in
>>> > pg_dumpall, say --with-system-acl or --with-system-privileges.
>>>
>>> Multiple versions were posted on this thread. I don't fault you for not
>>> finding it, this thread is a bit long in the tooth. The one I'm
>>> currently working from is
>>>
>>
>> It strikes me that this thread would possibly benefit from a wiki page
>> outlining the permissions, overall concepts, etc, as it's getting awfully
>> hard to follow.
>
> +1. This has proved to be very beneficial for UPSERT.

I am marking this patch as returned with feedback per the current
status of this thread.
--
Michael