Re: Allow placeholders in ALTER ROLE w/o superuser

From: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steve Chavez <steve(at)supabase(dot)io>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Allow placeholders in ALTER ROLE w/o superuser
Date: 2022-12-05 19:32:39
Message-ID: CAPpHfdu+6eNT1m_LTH52Q4teqogLPLDj-CmwXC8t7nf32ree-g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 8:18 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> > I couldn't find any discussion of the idea of adding "(s)" to the
> > variable name in order to mark the variable userset in the catalog, and
> > I have to admit I find it a bit strange. Are we really agreed that
> > that's the way to proceed?
>
> I hadn't been paying close attention to this thread, sorry.
>
> I agree that that seems like a very regrettable choice,
> especially if you anticipate having to bump catversion anyway.

I totally understand that this change requires a catversion bump.
I've reflected this in the commit message.

> Better to add a bool column to the catalog.

What about adding a boolean array to the pg_db_role_setting? So,
pg_db_role_setting would have the following columns.
* setdatabase oid
* setrole oid
* setconfig text[]
* setuser bool[]

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-12-05 19:41:47 Re: ANY_VALUE aggregate
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-12-05 19:32:09 Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)