Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT.
От | Mark Dilger |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 73B162AC-0A2D-4953-8E20-AFB423D2E4E3@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT. (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Oct 24, 2021, at 7:49 AM, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote: > > At this point, the idea of having a new role for maintenance work > looks good. With this patch and Mark Dilger's patch introducing a > bunch of new predefined roles, one concern is that we might reach to a > state where we will have patches being proposed for new predefined > roles for every database activity and the superuser eventually will > have nothing to do in the database, it just becomes dummy? > > I'm not sure if Mark Dilger's patch on new predefined roles has a > suitable/same role that we can use here. If you refer to the ALTER SYSTEM SET patches, which I agree introduce a number of new predefined roles, it may interest youthat Andrew has requested that I rework that patch set. In particular, he would like me to implement a new system ofgrants whereby the authority to ALTER SYSTEM SET can be granted per GUC rather than having predefined roles which hardcodedprivileges. I have not withdrawn the ALTER SYSTEM SET patches yet, as I don't know if Andrew's proposal can be made to work, but I wouldn'trecommend tying this pg_maintenance idea to that set. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: