Cleanup of the rules depending on users #585
Conversation
mbacovsky
commented
Jan 26, 2024
mbacovsky
commented
- missing groups were created in Rover
- users were added to the respective groups
- accesses for some legacy accounts were removed
- missing groups were created in Rover - users were added to the respective groups - accesses for some lagacy accounts were removed
|
For some changes I'll ask @falox for double check. |
| "schema": "(ccx|ccx_sensitive|ccx_srep|ccx_internal|ccx_workloads)", | ||
| "owner": true | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "group": "ccx-srep-data-access", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure why we gave ccx-srep-data-access and ccx-research-pipeline-trino ownership of the schemas. Is it needed to sync the partitions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure either. It seems safe to remove this to me.
| "privileges": ["SELECT"] | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "group": "ccx-dev|assisted-lakers|ccx-datalake-access|ceeandpe|na-cs-tam-auto|apac-cs-tam-auto|latam-cs-tam-auto|emea-cs-tam-auto|na-ps-cs-tam-auto|emea-cs-csm-auto|emea-cs-cse-auto|emea-cs-managers|apac-cs-csm-auto|apac-cs-cse-auto|na-cs-csm-auto|na-cs-cse-auto|na-ps-cs-cse-auto|latam-cs-csm-auto|cs-csa-auto-ccx|ccx-pm|telemeter-auth|telemeter-auto-approval|telemeter-manual-approval|cee-sbr-shift|gcs-csm|asr-insights-dashboards", | ||
| "schema": "ccx", | ||
| "privileges": ["SELECT"] | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "user": "superset-ccx", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@accorvin are these superset accounts still used? I didn't find them in Rover
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mbacovsky no, superset-ccx is no longer used so this is safe to remove.
| "privileges": ["SELECT"] | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "user": "(telemetry-automated|telemetry-edmund-abbot|telemetry-analytics)", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
telemetry-automated is not in Rover neither Edmund Abbot so I skipped those. telemetry-analytics was added.
|
LGTM. I would merge next week (Mon 5th), unless @accorvin needs this week |
|
@accorvin what is the plan with this? Do you prefer to merge and test in Trino first or apply the changes to Starburst only? Is there anything I could do to help with either option? |
|
@mbacovsky hey, sorry, I forgot abut this one. Everything looks good to me here. I'm inclined to merge this now and let it apply to trino, and I've already given the Starburst team the heads up to pull in these changes too. Give me a final +1 and I'll merge this. |
|
Ok, lets merge. If we have Friday to monitor and fix eventual issues, +1 from me. |
