Re: Should SET ROLE inherit config params?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Should SET ROLE inherit config params?
Date: 2009-03-15 22:09:32
Message-ID: 27654.1237154972@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> The question is why this should be tied to SET ROLE, which already has
>> well defined semantics that don't include any such behavior.

> Mostly because we don't have anywhere else to hang a "settings profile"
> than ROLEs.

So we should fix that, if we want a feature like this.

> And currently, we can define settings with roles; the fact
> that those settings materially only apply to login roles and not to
> non-login roles could even be seen as inconsistent.

[ shrug... ] The behavior of SET ROLE is defined by the standard. The
behavior at login is not.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Xin Wang 2009-03-16 02:18:56 How to implement an auto-increment column for a system catalog table?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-03-15 22:06:30 Re: hstore patch, part 1