Re: Weird pg_dumpall bug?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Weird pg_dumpall bug?
Date: 2006-01-24 15:38:47
Message-ID: 1138117127.3177.8.camel@swithin
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 10:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > Hmmmm...actually. It's because I have a user called 'support' and a
> > group called 'support'.
>
> It's possible to support this: the group
> and the user will now really be the same entity, ie a role that has both
> its own login privileges and members.
>

Assuming you actually want to unify the two objects. That might well be
the common case, but will it always be true?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-01-24 15:42:17 Re: Weird pg_dumpall bug?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-01-24 15:11:07 Re: [HACKERS] CIDR/INET improvements