Re: ASYNC Privileges proposal
| От | Chris Farmiloe |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: ASYNC Privileges proposal |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAJNjj-u5nPBQyrFwGvGjToys=w29-WoevVie8btf6WRn=eW=1w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: ASYNC Privileges proposal (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
So I would think that if this was to go further then "channels" would need to be more of a first class citizen and created explicitly, with CREATE CHANNEL, DROP CHANNEL etc:
GRANT LISTEN ON CHANNEL channame TO rolename;
GRANT NOTIFY ON CHANNEL channame TO rolename;
LISTEN channame; -- OK
NOTIFY channame, 'hi'; -- OK
LISTEN xxxx; -- exception: no channel named "xxxx"
NOTIFY xxxx, 'hi'; -- exception: no channel named "xxxx"
Personally I think explicitly creating channels would be beneficial; I have hit issues where an typo in a channel name has caused a bug to go unnoticed for a while.
....But of course this would break backwards compatibility with the current model (with implicit channel names) so unless we wanted to force everyone to add "CREATE CHANNEL" statements during their upgrade then, maybe there would need to be some kind of system to workaround this....
Possibly some kind of "catch-all" channel, that enables implicit channel names?
GRANT LISTEN, NOTIFY ON CHANNEL * TO PUBLIC; -- enabled by default for backwards compat
NOTIFY xxxx; -- OK via * CHANNEL
LISTEN xxxx; -- OK via * CHANNEL
Chris
On 18 June 2013 18:31, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
Well, if we're going to have privs on LISTEN/NOTIFY at all, they should
>> I had a quick play to see what might be involved [attached], and would like to
>> hear people thoughts; good idea, bad idea, not like that! etc
>
> I question the usefulness of allowing listen/notify to be restricted to
> an entire class of users. The granularity of this seems too broad,
> though I am not sure if allowing message to be sent to a specific user
> is easily achievable.
be on specific message bands, i.e.:
REVOKE LISTEN ON 'cacheupdates' FROM PUBLIC;
GRANT LISTEN ON 'cacheupdates' TO webuser;
GRANT LISTEN ON ALL TO admin;
I can certainly see wanting this, but it'd be a great deal more
sophisticated than what Chris has proposed.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: