Re: role self-revocation
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: role self-revocation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 929258.1647016476@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: role self-revocation (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: role self-revocation
Re: role self-revocation |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > If we implement the link between the creating role and the created > role as role ownership, then we are surely just going to add a > rolowner column to pg_authid, and when the role is owned by nobody, I > think we should always just store a valid OID in it, rather than > sometimes storing 0. It just seems simpler. Any time we would store 0, > store the bootstrap superuser's pg_authid.oid value instead. That way > the OID is always valid, which probably lets us get by with fewer > special cases in the code. +1. Note that either case would also involve making entries in pg_shdepend; although for the case of roles owned by/granted to the bootstrap superuser, we could omit those on the usual grounds that we don't need to record dependencies on pinned objects. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: