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
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 |