+1 on the idea. Left some comments on the PR.

Yufei


On Fri, Mar 6, 2026 at 10:57 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> The proposed change LGTM too. I approved the PR in GH.
>
> I see a positive review from Michael in GH too.
>
> Since Michael also asked Dennis to review, I propose waiting a few more
> days before merging. How about merging on Mar 10?
>
> Cheers,
> Dmitri.
>
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2026 at 6:46 AM Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Praneeth,
> >
> > The changes make sense to me. I approved your PR.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alex
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 6, 2026 at 5:47 AM Travis Bowen <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Praneeth,
> > >
> > > Thanks for sending this out.
> > > I looked at the PR and think the motivation and PR makes sense.
> > >
> > > -Travis
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 11:20 AM vemula praneeth <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi dev,
> > > >
> > > > I've submitted PR #3927 (https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3927
> )
> > > > which adds a new catalog-level privilege CATALOG_READ_DATA (code
> 103).
> > > >
> > > > Motivation:
> > > > Currently, granting read-only access to a data analyst across an
> entire
> > > > catalog requires individually granting TABLE_READ_DATA on every
> table.
> > > > CATALOG_READ_DATA is a single catalog-level grant that subsumes:
> > > >   - TABLE_READ_DATA, TABLE_LIST, TABLE_READ_PROPERTIES
> > > >   - NAMESPACE_LIST, NAMESPACE_READ_PROPERTIES
> > > >   - VIEW_LIST, VIEW_READ_PROPERTIES
> > > >
> > > > It fits naturally between CATALOG_MANAGE_METADATA (no data access)
> > > > and CATALOG_MANAGE_CONTENT (full access), filling a gap for read-only
> > > > analyst principals.
> > > >
> > > > Feedback welcome!
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Praneeth
> > > >
> >
>

Reply via email to