Re: Superowners

On 30 January 2017 at 16:34, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 1/30/17 9:04 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> all I want in this release is
>> super-ownership.
>
> What exactly is super-ownership, and what problems does it solve?

The problem is that there is no easy way for a DBA to have privs on
multiple sets of objects, so there is a request for superuser in many
cases. Superuser is too strong for most situations, so we are stuck.
We need some middle ground where a single user can manage many "normal
application objects" (tables, views, sequences, matviews, functions,
indexes, triggers) without problem, while not compromising other areas
that require higher security.

Probably more than 50% of PostgreSQL installs now use services that
block superuser accounts, so the majority of PostgreSQL users are
affected by these problems.

The permissions desirable for logical replication are a good example
of this, but not in any sense the only issue.

My hope is that we release v10 with a permissions model that allows
logical replication to be realistically usable when superuser is not
available. This is not a new requirement, but the privilege aspect of
the logical replication has been pushed back. While thinking about
other problems of access control I've rethought this so I now see the
wider problem and would like to solve that rather than just focus on
the needs of logical replication.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services