Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_class changes for group ownership

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_class changes for group ownership
Date: 2004-12-29 18:04:40
Message-ID: 20041229180440.GC10437@ns.snowman.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> >   Due to the fact that group system id's and user system id's can
> >   overlap, pg_class will need to change in order to accomedate group
> >   ownership.  The things I've thought of so far, in order of preference:
> 
> I thought that the agreed-on direction for this was to merge users and
> groups into a single kind of entity, or at least make sure that they
> share a common unique identifier space.  Then AclId is still sufficient
> as an ownership indicator, and you don't need any of these kluges.
> IIRC something of this sort is needed for improved compliance with the
> SQL spec anyway --- see past discussions about "roles".

Ah, alright, sounds good to me.  I'll look into making them share a
common unique identifier space, that shouldn't be too difficult.  Of
course, that'll require a dump/restore, I expect..  I don't suppose that
could possibly happen before 8.0, eh? :)

	Stephen

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2004-12-29 18:05:26
Subject: Re: race condition for drop schema cascade?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-12-29 17:59:22
Subject: Re: pg_class changes for group ownership

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group