Rework confusing permissions for LOCK TABLE
Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2022-12-14T02:59:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- v1-0001-Rework-permissions-for-LOCK-TABLE.patch (text/x-patch) patch v1-0001
The existing permissions for LOCK TABLE are surprising/confusing. For instance, if you have UPDATE privileges on a table, you can lock in any mode *except* ACCESS SHARE. drop table x cascade; drop user u1; create user u1; create table x(i int); grant update on x to u1; set session authorization u1; begin; lock table x in access exclusive mode; -- succeeds commit; begin; lock table x in share mode; -- succeeds commit; begin; lock table x in access share mode; -- fails commit; I can't think of any reason for this behavior, and I didn't find an obvious answer in the last commits to touch that (2ad36c4e44, fa2642438f). Patch attached to simplify it. It uses the philosophy that, if you have permissions to lock at a given mode, you should be able to lock at strictly less-conflicting modes as well. -- Jeff Davis PostgreSQL Contributor Team - AWS
Commits
-
Simplify permissions for LOCK TABLE.
- c44f6334ca6f 16.0 landed