Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44C10634C68 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:51:12 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 97270-04 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:51:10 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from phoenix.advel.cz (phoenix.advel.cz [81.0.239.26]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 48149634B83 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:51:09 -0300 (ADT) Received: (qmail 18357 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2009 17:52:27 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.12.0.96?) (88.103.48.48) by 192.168.1.50 with SMTP; 16 Jun 2009 17:52:27 +0200 Message-ID: <4A37BF63.50008@pjmodos.net> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:50:59 +0200 From: Petr Jelinek User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PostgreSQL-development Subject: GRANT ON ALL IN schema Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200906/1015 X-Sequence-Number: 140070 Hi all, I am thinking about implementing GRANT ON ALL TABLES IN schema TODO item. I saw many people sending proposals to the list but nobody seemed to actually do anything. I have few questions and problems to iron out before I can start the implementation. I would also like to note that I am not going to implement the second part (GRANT ON NEW TABLES) of the proposed TODO item as there seems to be better solution to this which is Default ACLs (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/DefaultACL) - btw is anybody working on that ? If not I am interested in doing it also as a complementary patch to this one. Anyway back to my thoughts about this patch. First of all I see problem with the proposed syntax. For this syntax I think TABLES (FUNCTIONS, SEQUENCES, etc) would have to be added to keywords which is problematic because there are views named tables, sequences, views in information_schema so we can't really make them keywords. I have no idea how to get around this and I don't see good alternative syntax either. This is main and only real problem I have. The other stuff is minor, like do we want this only for tables, sequences, functions and views or do we want it for every object for which we have GRANT command. Also in standard GRANT there is no distinction between table and view, I guess in this case there should be. -- Regards Petr Jelinek (PJMODOS)