| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Recognizing superuser in pg_hba.conf |
| Date: | 2020-01-02 20:04:41 |
| Message-ID: | 9680.1577995481@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> We already have a reserved namespace when it comes to roles,
> specifically "pg_".. why invent something new like this '&' prefix when
> we could just declare that 'pg_superusers' is a role to which all
> superusers are members? Or something along those lines?
Meh. If the things aren't actually roles, I think this'd just
add confusion. Or were you proposing to implement them as roles?
I'm not sure if that would be practical in every case.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2020-01-02 20:13:00 | Re: Recognizing superuser in pg_hba.conf |
| Previous Message | Vik Fearing | 2020-01-02 20:04:27 | Re: Recognizing superuser in pg_hba.conf |