Horton

Re: Clarification on Role Access Rights to Table Indexes

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, Ayush Vatsa <ayushvatsa1810@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-02-18T16:30:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-general 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> That is a +1 for the specific design of "check SELECT on the index's
> table". I don't want to be closed-minded: if you have some strong
> reason for believing that's the wrong thing to do, I'm all ears.
> However, I'm presently of the view that it is exactly the right thing
> to do, to the point where I don't currently understand why there's
> anything to think about here.

I have no objection to it, but I wasn't as entirely convinced
as you are that it's the only plausible answer.

One specific thing I'm slightly worried about is that a naive
implementation would probably cause this function to lock the
table after the index, risking deadlock against queries that
take the locks in the more conventional order.  I don't recall
what if anything we've done about that in other places
(-ENOCAFFEINE).

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Fix privilege checks for pg_prewarm() on indexes.

  2. Fix lookup code for REINDEX INDEX.

  3. Fix redefinition of typedef RangeVar.

  4. Fix lookups in pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats().

  5. dblink: Avoid locking relation before privilege check.