From: | Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: CREATE/DROP ROLE transactional? GRANT/REVOKE? |
Date: | 2023-03-06 15:34:52 |
Message-ID: | CAFCRh-_9D-V61PcBKkDOZv-eitAA6h-mNtcub7LZ+o5Lm2Rz6Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 3:02 PM Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name> wrote:
> > On 06/03/2023 14:19 CET Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Perhaps I missed it in the doc (e.g. [1]), but are DDLs around ROLEs and
> > GRANTs transactional?
>
> Have you tried?
Nope. I thought about it, but then I could have convinced myself on an
invalid demo.
So I preferred to ask the experts.
> DDL is transactional unless stated otherwise (cf. CREATE DATABASE,
> CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, CREATE TABLESPACE).
>
I now see (and fully appreciate) the Note below:
- CREATE DATABASE cannot be executed inside a transaction block.
I didn't realize the fact CREATE ROLE didn't have that note was significant.
Run the following psql script:
>
Thanks for the demo. Appreciated.
> Since I'm creating many ROLEs and making many GRANTs, based info I read
> from
> > PostgreSQL itself (in pg_catalog and elsewhere), should everything be in
> a
> > single transaction?
>
> If it should be atomic and the commands are allowed in transactions, then
> yes,
> use transactions.
>
Thanks again. --DD
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dominique Devienne | 2023-03-06 15:39:25 | Re: CREATE/DROP ROLE transactional? GRANT/REVOKE? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-03-06 15:31:52 | Re: CREATE/DROP ROLE transactional? GRANT/REVOKE? |