Re: Orphaned users in PG16 and above can only be managed by Superusers
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Orphaned users in PG16 and above can only be managed by Superusers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e4ff7917-d65b-43db-b0c0-b07f48ae522f@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Orphaned users in PG16 and above can only be managed by Superusers (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Orphaned users in PG16 and above can only be managed by Superusers
Re: Orphaned users in PG16 and above can only be managed by Superusers |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025-01-23 Th 4:06 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 3:51 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: >> I wonder if it's a mistake that a role membership that has WITH ADMIN on >> another role is silently removed if the member role is removed. We e.g. do >> *not* do that for pg_auth_members.grantor: >> >> ERROR: 2BP01: role "r1" cannot be dropped because some objects depend on it >> DETAIL: privileges for membership of role r2 in role r3 > Yeah, I'm not sure about this either, but this is the kind of thing I > was thinking about when I replied before, saying that maybe dropping > role B shouldn't just succeed. Maybe dropping a role that doesn't have > privileges to administer any other role should be different than > dropping one that does. > That seems reasonable and consistent with what we do elsewhere, as Andres noted. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: