Re: database specific pg_read_all_data / pg_write_all_data

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: richard coleman <rcoleman(dot)ascentgl(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: database specific pg_read_all_data / pg_write_all_data
Date: 2025-12-10 14:25:29
Message-ID: CAKFQuwZducmkxoyh_=gvdHJ2Te5rHGctv70BQQsacmgMMjtZRw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Wednesday, December 10, 2025, richard coleman <
rcoleman(dot)ascentgl(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I hope that the PostgreSQL devs revisit it in the future with an eye
> towards making it applicable in more situations.
>

There are setups where roles can access multiple databases and in some of
those they have read/write all privileges and in others they do not?

Fundamentally making group-role memberships per-database is a fundamental
change that seems quite unappealing to attempt without a solid use case
that it will enable. iMO you’ve claims here do not establish a solid use
case - they are lacking convincing details. That said, the project is open
source - you can scratch your own itch. But the model change is still a
complexity hill to overcome.

David J.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laurenz Albe 2025-12-10 14:45:27 Re: database specific pg_read_all_data / pg_write_all_data
Previous Message richard coleman 2025-12-10 14:10:29 Re: database specific pg_read_all_data / pg_write_all_data