Re: TODO Item: ACL_CONNECT

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Gevik Babakhani <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: TODO Item: ACL_CONNECT
Date: 2006-04-25 12:59:17
Message-ID: 20060425125917.GG24421@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com) wrote:
> > Gevik Babakhani wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 23:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > Why are we debating this? It won't get accepted anyway, because the
> > > > whole thing is silly. Show me one other object type that we issue
> > > > such warnings for, or anyone else who has even suggested that we should.
> >
> > No other object type has the ability to require you to stop the server
> > and start a standalone backend to fix the mistake, which is what makes
> > this thing unique.
>
> Eh? Isn't that the case if you manage to remove the superuser bit from
> everyone? Yet it's allowed, I'm not even sure there's a warning.. In
> any case, what we do there can serve as precedent.

Hmm, true. Maybe we could raise a warning in that case as well :-)

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-04-25 13:00:41 Re: Summary of coverity bugs
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2006-04-25 12:57:31 Re: TODO Item: ACL_CONNECT