From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Missing variable "role" in "pg_settings"? |
Date: | 2005-12-04 04:22:10 |
Message-ID: | 200512040422.jB44MAq11954@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgadmin-hackers pgsql-general |
Based on this email, should we be showing ROLE from SHOW ALL?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Florian G. Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
> >
> >>The per-session variable "role" is not shown when
> >>doing "select pg_settings". It is, however, possible
> >>to set it using "set role ...", and to query it using
> >>"show role". Is this per design, or is this a bug.
> >
> > It's marked NO_SHOW_ALL in guc.c. I'm not sure about the reasoning
> > for this --- session_authorization is the same way, and we probably
> > just copied that when we made the role variable; but I've forgotten
> > what the rationale for marking session_authorization as NO_SHOW_ALL
> > was.
>
> Isn't "set session authorization <user>" basically the same
> as "set role <user>" (Not from an implemenation standpoint, but
> from the standpoint of the user), with "set role" being more generic,
> because it's also allowed for non-superusers? In that case, omiting
> "session_authorization" while showing "role" would make sense..
>
> And, additionally, "alter user <user> set session authorization <other
> user>" doesn't seem to make much sense...
>
> >>In case omiting role from pg_settings is per design,
> >>how could pgadmin find _all_ variables that can be set per user?
> >
> > If this is an argument for not having *any* NO_SHOW_ALL variables,
> > I think the answer will be "no".
> I don't quite understand what the "no" refers to...
> I think Andreas Pflug now commited a patch that manually adds
> "role" to the list of per-user variables in pgadmin3 - but in the
> long run, there should be a better solution...
>
> greetings, Florian Pflug
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-04 04:35:26 | Re: [GENERAL] Missing variable "role" in "pg_settings"? |
Previous Message | Andreas Pflug | 2005-12-03 02:26:43 | Re: 1.4.1 Release |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-04 04:29:43 | Re: New.* and old.* as function arguments within rules |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-04 03:33:03 | Re: int to inet conversion |