From: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Per-Database Roles |
Date: | 2012-05-22 15:57:57 |
Message-ID: | 728F3649-DDCD-41AD-B152-D44C9A097508@phlo.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On May22, 2012, at 16:09 , Tom Lane wrote:
> Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> writes:
>> Conflicts would occur where localrolename matches an existing local
>> role name within the same database, or a global role name, but not a
>> local role name within another database. The problem with this,
>> however, is that creating global roles would need conflict checks
>> against local roles in every database, unless a manifest of all local
>> roles were registered globally.
>
> Yeah. The same type of issue arises for the roles' OIDs. You'd really
> want local and global roles to have nonconflicting OIDs, else it's
> necessary to carry around an indication of which type each role is;
> which would be more or less a show-stopper in terms of the number of
> catalogs and internal APIs affected. But I don't currently see any
> nice way to guarantee that if each database has a private table of
> local roles.
Maybe we could simply make all global role's OIDs even, and all local ones
odd, or something like that.
best regards,
Florian Pflug
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-05-22 15:59:24 | Re: Readme of Buffer Management seems to have wrong sentence |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-05-22 15:42:55 | Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE |