| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Cédric Villemain <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: new createuser option for replication role |
| Date: | 2011-09-23 13:29:01 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZofg-R-NVh-C59Se_ySroezZovOVpyupcTsoBCxyu4SQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Agreed. Attached is the updated version of the patch. It adds two options
> --replication and --no-replication. If neither specified, neither REPLICATION
> nor NOREPLICATION is specified in CREATE ROLE, i.e., in this case,
> replication privilege is granted to only superuser.
Committed. Do we need to make any changes in interactive mode, when
we prompt? In theory this could be either wanted or not wanted for
either superusers or non-superusers, but I'm not really sure it's
worth it, and I certainly don't want the command to go into
interactive mode just because neither --replication nor
--no-replication was specified.
Thoughts?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yeb Havinga | 2011-09-23 13:30:55 | Re: Satisfy extension dependency by one of multiple extensions |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-09-23 13:11:59 | Re: [v9.2] make_greater_string() does not return a string in some cases |