Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > Notwithstanding the lack of agreement on that point, I believe that > what we should do for v15 is remove the session user > self-administration exception. We have pretty much established that it > was originally introduced in error.
Agreed. > However, it might. And if it does, I think it would be best if > removing that exception were the *only* change in this area made by > that release. Good idea, especially since it's getting to be too late to consider anything more invasive anyway. > So I propose to commit something like what I posted here: > http://postgr.es/m/ca+tgmobgek0jraowqvpqhsxcfbdfitxsomoebhmmmhmj4gl...@mail.gmail.com +1, although the comments might need some more work. In particular, I'm not sure that this bit is well stated: + * A role cannot have WITH ADMIN OPTION on itself, because that would + * imply a membership loop. We already do consider a role to be a member of itself: regression=# create role r; CREATE ROLE regression=# grant r to r; ERROR: role "r" is a member of role "r" regression=# grant r to r with admin option; ERROR: role "r" is a member of role "r" It might be better to just say "By policy, a role cannot have WITH ADMIN OPTION on itself". But if you want to write a defense of that policy, this isn't a very good one. regards, tom lane
