| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why no pg_has_role(..., 'ADMIN')? |
| Date: | 2024-09-20 18:16:38 |
| Message-ID: | 2468702.1726856198@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I think this already exists. The full list of modes supported by
> pg_has_role() is listed in convert_role_priv_string(). You can do
> something like pg_has_role('alice', 'USAGE WITH ADMIN OPTION'). This
> is not new: it worked in older releases too, but AFAIK it's never been
> mentioned in the documentation.
Surely that's a bad documentation omission. Do we want to document
all the variants convert_role_priv_string allows? They appear
functionally equivalent, so I'd be inclined to document just one.
'USAGE WITH ADMIN OPTION' seems a reasonable choice.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-09-20 18:34:27 | Re: Why no pg_has_role(..., 'ADMIN')? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-09-20 16:51:01 | Re: Why no pg_has_role(..., 'ADMIN')? |