Skip to content
All articles
Engineering10 January 2025·3 min read

How to implement row-level security with Paycux FGA and Postgres: tutorial and code

The engineering questions that matter are rarely about which tool.

Paycux engineering

The engineering questions that matter are rarely about which tool. They are about which failure you are willing to own, and how loudly it will tell you when it happens.

This piece walks through how we think about it at Paycux, what we have changed our minds about, and where the sharp edges are.

App at a glance

Consider app at a glance. Make the boundary explicit. When one part of the system can only talk to another through a named interface, you can change either side without a meeting; when it cannot, every change becomes a negotiation.

Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

Database schema and FGA integration

Database schema and FGA integration is where this gets concrete. Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

  • Name the boundary before you cross it
  • Measure what users feel, not what is easy to instrument
  • Make every retried operation idempotent
  • Write down the assumption that would invalidate the design

Building the app: step by step

Building the app: step by step deserves its own treatment. Measure before you optimise, then measure the thing users feel rather than the thing that is easy to instrument. A p50 that looks fine while the p99 is unusable is a reporting failure, not a performance one.

Make the boundary explicit. When one part of the system can only talk to another through a named interface, you can change either side without a meeting; when it cannot, every change becomes a negotiation.

Step 1. Define the Paycux FGA authorization model

Step 1. Define the Paycux FGA authorization model is where this gets concrete. Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

Measure before you optimise, then measure the thing users feel rather than the thing that is easy to instrument. A p50 that looks fine while the p99 is unusable is a reporting failure, not a performance one.

Measure before you optimise, then measure the thing users feel rather than the thing that is easy to instrument.

Step 2. Implement row-level security

That brings us to step 2. implement row-level security. Measure before you optimise, then measure the thing users feel rather than the thing that is easy to instrument. A p50 that looks fine while the p99 is unusable is a reporting failure, not a performance one.

Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

Step 3. Set up permissions via Paycux warrants

Step 3. Set up permissions via Paycux warrants is where this gets concrete. Make the boundary explicit. When one part of the system can only talk to another through a named interface, you can change either side without a meeting; when it cannot, every change becomes a negotiation.

Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

Step 4. Test the system

That brings us to step 4. test the system. Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

Make the boundary explicit. When one part of the system can only talk to another through a named interface, you can change either side without a meeting; when it cannot, every change becomes a negotiation.

Where this leaves us

The pattern repeats across every system we have looked at: the hard part is not the mechanism, it is keeping the mechanism honest as the surrounding assumptions change.

If you are working through the same problem and want to compare notes, the docs cover the mechanics and the console shows the behaviour on your own data.

Everything here, already built

Sign-in, enterprise SSO, directory provisioning, roles and an audit trail behind one API. Start with the quickstart and have a working sign-in this afternoon.

Start selling to enterprise customers

Create an account, point sign-in at Paycux, and get back to the part of the product that is actually yours.