> On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:06 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 3/24/22 12:49, Mark Dilger wrote:
>>
>>> On Mar 17, 2022, at 8:41 AM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> If we abandoned that for this form of GRANT/REVOKE I think we could
>>> probably get away with
>>>
>>>
>>> GRANT { SET | ALTER SYSTEM } ON setting_name ...
>>>
>>>
>>> I haven't tried it, so I could be all wrong.
>> Version 12 of the patch uses SET and ALTER SYSTEM as the names of the
>> privileges, and PARAMETER as the name of the thing on which the privilege is
>> granted. The catalog table which tracks these grants is now named
>> pg_parameter_acl, and various other parts of the patch have been adjusted to
>> use a "parameter" based, rather than a "setting" based, naming scheme. One
>> exception to this rule is the "setacl" column in pg_parameter_acl, which is
>> much more compact than the "parameteracl" name would be, so that remains
>> under the old name.
>
>
> I can live with it I guess, but it seems perverse to me to have
> pg_settings but pg_paramater_acl effectively referring to the same set
> of things. If we're going to do this perhaps we should create a
> pg_parameters view which is identical to pg_settings and deprecate
> pg_settings. I don;t want to hold up this patch, I think this can
> probably be managed as a follow up item.
Right, the version 12 patch was following Peter's and Tom's comments upthread:
> On Mar 17, 2022, at 7:47 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Well, I still say that "SET" is sufficient for the one privilege name
> (unless we really can't make Bison handle that, which I doubt). But
> I'm willing to yield on using "ALTER SYSTEM" for the other.
>
> If we go with s/SETTING/PARAMETER/ as per your other message, then
> that would be adequately consistent with the docs I think. So it'd
> be
>
> GRANT { SET | ALTER SYSTEM } ON PARAMETER foo TO ...
>
> and the new catalog would be pg_parameter_acl, and so on.
We could debate that again, but it seems awfully late in the development cycle.
I'd rather just get this committed, barring any objections?
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
