Horton

Re: pg_auth_members.grantor is bunk

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: Jacob Champion <jchampion@timescale.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-09-21T20:53:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 1:26 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> CI is happier with this version, so I've committed 0001. If no major
>> problems emerge, I'll proceed with 0002 as well.

> Done.

Shouldn't the CF entry [1] be closed as committed?

			regards, tom lane

[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/39/3745/

Commits

  1. Make role grant system more consistent with other privileges.

  2. Ensure that pg_auth_members.grantor is always valid.

  3. Remove the ability of a role to administer itself.

  4. Add tests of the CREATEROLE attribute

  5. Replace explicit PIN entries in pg_depend with an OID range test.

  6. Shore up ADMIN OPTION restrictions.

  7. Add pg_has_role() family of privilege inquiry functions modeled after the

  8. Align GRANT/REVOKE behavior more closely with the SQL spec, per discussion