Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning

From:Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To:Shigeru HANADA <hanada(at)metrosystems(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc:Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject:Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning
Date:2011-04-14 18:43:52
Message-ID:[email protected]
Views:Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists:pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Shigeru HANADA
<hanada(at)metrosystems(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> In addition to the 2nd GRANT above, "GRANT SELECT (colour) ON stuff TO
> user_a" (omitting TABLE) will succeed too because parser assumes that
> the target object is a regular table if object type was TABLE or
> omitted. This inconsistent behavior would be an oversight and need to
> be fixed.

+1.

> How about to drop "GRANT xxx ON FOREIGN TABLE foo" syntax support and
> use "GRANT xxx ON [TABLE] foo" for foreign tables?  ISTM that "ON
> FOREIGN TABLE" specification is useless because possible privilege
> type would be same as TABLE.

-1. We should be consistent about treating foreign tables as their
own object type - and the possible privilege types are NOT the same -
only SELECT is supported.

> Probabry we should mention in GRANT documents that ALL TABLES
> IN SCHEMA is considered to include foreign tables.

Or else change the behavior so that it doesn't, which would probably be my vote.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

 FromDateSubject
Next MessageRobert Haas2011-04-14 18:45:57Re: Proposal for GSoC : ADJ dasard (Administration related software)
Previous MessageRobert Haas2011-04-14 18:40:52Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning