Re: dropping a user causes pain (#2)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: dropping a user causes pain (#2) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3681.1060621817@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: dropping a user causes pain (#2) (Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: dropping a user causes pain (#2)
Re: dropping a user causes pain (#2) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de> writes: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> OTOH I'm not sure how much harm this causes, other than aesthetic. >> > Dropping a user could merely set a "dropped" flag to disable login, and > some VACUUM action could cleanup databases. Not sure I care for the "vacuum" part of that, but how about this variant: DROP USER sets a flag in pg_shadow to disable login, and the pg_shadow entry isn't removed, ever. (We could tweak the pg_user view to hide dropped users, but anything looking directly at pg_shadow would have to be taught about the flag, analogous to what happened with attisdropped in the last release.) The advantage here is that the sysid assigned to the user would remain present in pg_shadow and couldn't accidentally be assigned to a new user. This would prevent the problem of new users "inheriting" permissions and even object ownership from deleted users due to chance coincidence of sysid. I suppose one could delete the pg_shadow row once one is darn certain there is no trace of the user's sysid anywhere, but it's not clear to me it's worth the trouble. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: