From: | Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: CREATE/DROP ROLE transactional? GRANT/REVOKE? |
Date: | 2023-03-06 15:25:24 |
Message-ID: | CAFCRh-9LrNimgRg+3e7kcw8yv=PGUwpbGOwzAg4QM21eud0rJw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 4:06 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Hi. Perhaps I missed it in the doc (e.g. [1]), but are DDLs around ROLEs
> > and GRANTs transactional?
>
> Your expectation is set wrongly.
Thanks for the precision Tom.
Although I'm not sure where you read my expectectation was wrong. But
nevermind.
> DDL commands in Postgres are
> transactional unless their man page explicitly says they're not.
>
OK, didn't know that. Glad to read it.
Could you point to where in the doc this is stated?
It's hard to be sure about something the doc does *not* mention,
when what is *implied* is hard to find, or at a distance. Especially
at least another well known RDBMS differ in that department.
I much prefer the way PostgreSQL handles DDL, still it's not obvious.
My $0.02. Thanks, --DD
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-03-06 15:31:52 | Re: CREATE/DROP ROLE transactional? GRANT/REVOKE? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-03-06 15:06:12 | Re: CREATE/DROP ROLE transactional? GRANT/REVOKE? |