On Mar 19, 2010, at 4:51 PM, Eric Day wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 04:05:03PM -0500, Tim Soderstrom wrote: >> Ah ok. So basically you will be able to specify which database (and/or >> catalog) someone can access but that's basically an all access backstage >> pass to the DB (ie no allowing reads but not writes, etc.)? > > That's currently how it works, but having some level of ACL > (read/write) will probably be the next step. Basically, whatever is > practical and doesn't hurt performance significantly. >
Makes sense. Having some read/write control would be nice. I rarely see a use-case beyond just needing a read-only user for a database. Even then, those are not very common (I see them mostly with replication when setting read_only globally is not practical). I rather the enjoy the idea of not having to care about columnar or even table-level permissions myself :) But that's just me. YMMV :) _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
