Re: pg_upgrade check for invalid role-specific default config

Tom wrote:
> I do find it interesting that we now have two reports of somebody
> doing "ALTER ROLE SET role = something".  In the older thread,
> I was skeptical that that had any real use-case, so I wonder if
> Charlie has a rationale for having done that.

Unfortunately I haven't heard back from the original developer
who set up this role configuration, but if I do then I will share
their intentions.  In any case the invalid configuration had been
removed from every other role except one (certainly by mistake)
which lead to me rediscovering this issue.

I tested the above patch with the invalid data locally and it avoids
the restore error that we ran into previously.  Also it requires no
intervention to progress with pg_upgrade unlike my initial idea of
adding an check, so it is definitely simpler from a user perspective.

Thank you for taking a deep look into this and finding a better
solution.

Best regards,
Charlie Hornsby