Thread

1. Privileges

   Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> — 2010-04-19T21:27:39Z

   There is a command to set privileges
   
     GRANT SELECT ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA foo TO PUBLIC;
   
   and a command to set default privileges
   
     ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES IN SCHEMA foo
     GRANT SELECT ON TABLES TO PUBLIC;
   
   In the first command the ALL is required, whereas in the second command
   the ALL must be absent.
   
   ISTM that the ALL should be optional in both cases.
   Same thing is true for FUNCTIONS and SEQUENCES.
   
   Both options are new in 9.0.
   
   Any objections to implementing this simple patch?
   
   -- 
    Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com
   

2. Re: Privileges

   Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2010-04-19T23:26:26Z

   Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
   > There is a command to set privileges
   
   >   GRANT SELECT ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA foo TO PUBLIC;
   
   > and a command to set default privileges
   
   >   ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES IN SCHEMA foo
   >   GRANT SELECT ON TABLES TO PUBLIC;
   
   > In the first command the ALL is required, whereas in the second command
   > the ALL must be absent.
   
   > ISTM that the ALL should be optional in both cases.
   
   I don't believe this is a good idea.  ALL in the second statement would
   give a completely misleading impression, because it does *not* grant
   privileges on all tables, in particular it doesn't affect existing
   tables.  Conversely, leaving out ALL in the first statement would limit
   our flexibility to insert additional options there in future.  (ALL is a
   fully reserved word, TABLES isn't, so your proposal greatly increases
   the odds of future syntactic conflicts.)
   
   			regards, tom lane