RE: CREATE USER

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Thomas Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, "Lista PGSQL" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Diego Schvartzman" <dschvar(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: RE: CREATE USER
Date: 2000-06-01 07:30:51
Message-ID: 000a01bfcb9b$504f31c0$2801007e@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
>
> "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > How about starting new transaction automatically after committing
> > "create user ..." at backend side if "create user" is the first command
> > of the transaction ?
>
> So then
> begin;
> create user ...;
> rollback;
>
> would do the wrong thing --- silently?
>

It seems not wrong that un-rollbackable command is never rolled back.
At least it doesn't cause inconsistency.

> I don't think that's an improvement :-(
>
> The only reason CREATE USER isn't rollbackable is that the flat password
> file is updated immediately by a trigger, rather than at transaction
> commit. The right fix would be to defer the update until commit (which
> is certainly doable, though it might mean hardwired support for the
> update instead of doing it in a generic trigger function).
>
> If that seems like too much work,

I don't prefer flat file solution as I mentioned before.

> how about downgrading the "create
> user not allowed in transaction" error to a "please don't abort now"
> notice?

Sounds preferable.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Harvey Chapman 2000-06-01 08:17:08 Re: Re: Speed of locating tables
Previous Message Jurgen Defurne 2000-06-01 06:49:04 Re: Re: Speed of locating tables