| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Superowners |
| Date: | 2017-01-30 15:32:24 |
| Message-ID: | a43ee869-94e4-d34d-8caa-6627c57dff25@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/29/17 7:44 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I would think we'd either do this with a default role or a role
> attribute.
That's not how I think about it. I think this would be a separate
aclitem[] stored somewhere. The pg_xxx_aclcheck() functions could
consult that implicitly.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-01-30 15:34:34 | Re: Superowners |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-01-30 15:26:18 | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |