Horton

Re: allow granting CLUSTER, REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, and REINDEX

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>, Pavel Luzanov <p.luzanov@postgrespro.ru>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2023-06-20T17:42:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 09:16:59AM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 14:26 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> TBH, I have a mixed feeling about this line of reasoning because
>> MAINTAIN is much broader and less specific than TRUNCATE, for
>> instance, being spawned across so much more operations.
> 
> ...
> 
>> Some users may find that surprising as they
>> used to have more control over these operations as owners of the
>> relations worked on.
> 
> It seems like the user shouldn't be surprised if they can carry out the
> action; nor should they be surprised if they can't carry out the
> action. Having privileges revoked on a table from the table's owner is
> an edge case in behavior and both make sense to me.
> 
> In the absense of a use case, I'd be inclined towards just being
> consistent with the other privileges.

Agreed, I think we should make MAINTAIN consistent with the other grantable
privileges.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Commits

  1. Improve privilege documentation for maintenance commands.

  2. Fix cache lookup hazards introduced by ff9618e82a.

  3. Move bool parameter for vacuum_rel() to option bits.

  4. Fix MAINTAIN privileges for toast tables and partitions.

  5. Add grantable MAINTAIN privilege and pg_maintain role.