Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmobkYXNOWKEKzX2qGPSr_nvacFGueV=orxND-xmZvOVYvg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: > * Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote: >> Ah, good point. Using ALTER ROLE is better. Maybe we should do ALTER >> ROLE .. [ ADD | DROP ] CAPABILITY x. That would still require making >> CAPABILITY a keyword, but it could be unreserved. > > That works for me- would we change the existing role attributes to be > configurable this way and change everything over to using an int64 in > the catalog? Unless I'm having trouble counting, I think that would > actually result in the pg_authid catalog not changing in size at all > while giving us the ability to add these capabilities and something like > 50 others if we had cause to. I definitely think we should support the new syntax for the existing attributes. I could go either way on whether to change the catalog storage for the existing attributes. Some people might prefer to avoid the backward compatibility break, and I can see that argument. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: