Robert Haas <> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Stephen Frost <> wrote:
>> Second, as always, what's the syntax going to actually be?  I don't
>> think GRANT SAME PERMISSIONS is going to work out too well in the
>> parser, and it seems a bit grotty to me anyway.  I do think this should
>> be associated with GRANT rather than ALTER TABLE- GRANT is what we use
>> for managing privileges on an object.

> One thing to think about is that GRANT sort of implies adding
> privileges, but this operation would both add and remove privileges as
> necessary.

Other things to think about:

1. If you can GRANT x, that generally implies that you can REVOKE x.

2. The GRANT/REVOKE syntax is largely governed by the SQL standard.
We risk getting boxed in by picking something that will conflict
with future spec extensions in this area.

On the whole, I suspect some sort of "ALTER TABLE x COPY PERMISSIONS
FROM y" syntax would be better.

BTW, please specify what the grantor of the resulting permissions
would be.  I rather doubt that it should involve blindly copying
the source ACL if the user doing the COPY is not the original
grantor --- that feels way too much like a security problem
waiting to happen.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to