Re: improve predefined roles documentation
От | Nathan Bossart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: improve predefined roles documentation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ZnWe3RgnCV4RR9KB@nathan обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: improve predefined roles documentation ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: improve predefined roles documentation
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 07:57:16PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > I like this. Losing the table turned out to be ok. Thank you. Awesome. > I would probably put pg_monitor first in the list. Done. > + A user granted this role cannot however send signals to a backend owned > by a superuser. > > Remove "however", or put commas around it. I prefer the first option. This sentence caught my eye earlier, too, because it seems to imply that a superuser granted this role cannot signal superuser-owned backends. I changed it to the following: Note that this role does not permit signaling backends owned by a superuser. How does that sound? > Do we really need to repeat "even without having it explicitly" everywhere? Removed. > + This role does not have the role attribute BYPASSRLS set. > > Even if it did, that attribute isn't inherited anyway... > > "This role is still governed by any row level security policies that may be > in force. Consider setting the BYPASSRLS attribute on member roles." > > (assuming they intend it to be ALL data then doing the bypassrls even if > they are not today using it doesn't hurt) How does something like the following sound? This role does not bypass row-level security (RLS) policies. If RLS is being used, an administrator may wish to set BYPASSRLS on roles which this role is granted to. > pg_stat_scan_tables - This explanation leaves me wanting more. Maybe give > an example of such a function? I think the bar is set a bit too high just > talking about a specific lock level. I was surprised to learn that this role only provides privileges for functions in contrib/ modules. Anyway, added an example. > "As these roles are able to access any file on the server file system," > > We forbid running under root so this isn't really true. They do have > operating system level access logged in as the database process owner. > They are able to access all PostgreSQL files on the server file system and > usually can run a wide-variety of commands on the server. I just deleted this clause. > "access, therefore great care should be taken" > > I would go with: > > "access. Great care should be taken" > > Seems more impactful as its own sentence then at the end of a long > multi-part sentence. Done. > "server with COPY any other file-access functions." - s/with/using/ Done. -- nathan
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: