Re: [PATCHES] Users/Groups -> Roles

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Users/Groups -> Roles
Date: 2005-07-01 20:20:20
Message-ID: 20050701202020.GF24207@ns.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

* Robert Treat (xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net) wrote:
> On Friday 01 July 2005 13:07, Stephen Frost wrote:
> However On Friday 01 July 2005 13:02, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Bruce Momjian (pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> > > Stupid question, but how do roles relate to our existing "groups"?
> >
> > Uhhh. There are no longer "groups", they've been replaced with roles
> > (which can have members).
> >
>
> Was following this conversation up till now, because these two statement seem
> to contradict each other. Do we really support groups still, are is CREATE
> GROUP now syntactical sugar for some for of CREATE ROLE.

CREATE GROUP just does a CREATE ROLE now, yeah. You can check gram.y
for the details if you'd like. We do still support \du and \dg
(pg_users and pg_groups respectively, iirc) for backwards compat. and to
help folks get used to the new stuff.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2005-07-01 20:26:33 Re: psql tab-completion for COMMIT/ROLLBACK PREPARED
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-07-01 20:17:49 Re: [PATCHES] Users/Groups -> Roles

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2005-07-01 20:26:33 Re: psql tab-completion for COMMIT/ROLLBACK PREPARED
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-07-01 20:17:49 Re: [PATCHES] Users/Groups -> Roles