From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Should SET ROLE inherit config params? |
Date: | 2009-03-15 21:47:14 |
Message-ID: | 49BD7762.2060908@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> What I want to be able to do is to set different bunches of resource
>> management settings for various non-login inherited roles, and be able
>> to choose profiles via a SET ROLE. The reason to do this, btw, instead
>> of defining various login roles, is that different login roles can't
>> share the same connection pool.
>
> The question is why this should be tied to SET ROLE, which already has
> well defined semantics that don't include any such behavior.
Mostly because we don't have anywhere else to hang a "settings profile"
than ROLEs. And currently, we can define settings with roles; the fact
that those settings materially only apply to login roles and not to
non-login roles could even be seen as inconsistent.
--Josh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2009-03-15 21:50:05 | Re: hstore improvements? |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2009-03-15 21:45:33 | Re: Prepping to break every past release... |