public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Jim Jones <[email protected]>
To: Marcos Magueta <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrey Borodin <[email protected]>
Cc: Kirill Reshke <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: WIP - xmlvalidate implementation from TODO list
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2026 08:55:03 +0100
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAN3aFCdW3_RNgidcV_vWA-NFeYf6p7M5VMG8moSzk3bBJneUxQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAN3aFCdx8AapWSVpJ1kaC7OC_v7QwbjgbGw9WfPBBY2GMyOadQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAN3aFCcXwS7BrU1gHRUEBH3G59EVf_7LUhLeEWqW2Sc9Vk5k-A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAN3aFCe_cBshj0rb7J8yoT+fRHOBOZmk-m8V7DMLDe0ZjSgjcA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAN3aFCc2voQ=6+Nwy99NFJZwveYmwtCKAj6U9RhjxqQc25+Q_g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAN3aFCcUFLbdVBoL6c2bMh4r5P9EnXM9eBsX8+ZyER7YBSDUtA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAN3aFCecpcPBs4x3KUuxTqvY2VzpCZZKrBphNaQjE5uD8UtEpQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAN3aFCcb0Nvap1CKShd5RNa+V+pray+ur_LtOON3nkwqdh5NMA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAN3aFCdW3_RNgidcV_vWA-NFeYf6p7M5VMG8moSzk3bBJneUxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Marcos,
Thanks for the update.
On 18/02/2026 20:20, Marcos Magueta wrote:
> Here's the v6 with the docs updated and some minor things.
Unfortunately, the patch no longer applies.[1]
> I was trying to figure out how to do the roles, and I have some thoughts
> on it now. While I am not particularly against predefined roles, I think
> we should be careful before committing to them in this form. As
> predefined roles, they would effectively become part of a long-term
> public interface: once they exist, we should then carry them forward and
> preserve their semantics across releases, so adding a feature-specific
> role increases permanent surface area (docs, tests, upgrade behavior,
> compatibility expectations) and is harder to revisit later if the
> privilege model evolves (which I think will make people mad, it's XML
> burden after all).
>
> Also, a write-oriented role is not as straightforward as I thought with
> the current ownership model (and that's me guessing here). Mutating DDL
> behavior is still owner-driven (or superuser-driven) most of the places,
> not purely ACL-driven, so a pg_write_xmlschemas role can look clearer at
> first glance than it is in practice. To make that role fully consistent,
> we may need broader policy decisions around what should be grantable
> versus what should remain ownership-based, not just new role entries.
> Again, I am not opposed to the idea, but these made me a bit anxious to
> simply add them. What are your thoughts on these?
The creation of XML schemas does not need to be specifically controlled
by predefined roles - it was just the first thing that came to mind. My
concern was that leaving it entirely open to any user could lead to
unwanted CPU or memory usage. Perhaps the other reviewers have a
different opinion on this.
Best, Jim
1 - https://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_6372.log
view thread (9+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: WIP - xmlvalidate implementation from TODO list
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox