Re: psql: Add role's membership options to the \du+ command

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, rmt(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: psql: Add role's membership options to the \du+ command
Date: 2023-07-13 15:40:35
Message-ID: CAKFQuwbRjAxHw6B3GkEgU9oizN4u1-u05kr3dUHWOaiqUhN=ig@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 8:01 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> > I plan to replace it to:
>
> > pg_catalog.concat_ws(', ',
> > CASE WHEN pam.admin_option THEN 'ADMIN' END,
> > CASE WHEN m.rolinherit THEN 'INHERIT' END,
> > 'SET'
> > ) AS "Options",
>
> That does not seem right. Is it impossible for pam.set_option
> to be false? Even if it is, should this code assume that?
>
>
That replacement is for version 15 and earlier where pam.set_option doesn't
exist at all and the presence of a row here means that set has been granted.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2023-07-13 15:41:29 Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2023-07-13 15:38:10 Re: MERGE ... RETURNING