Re: ALTER ROLES - questions

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:49:35AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> > I played around with roles a bit today and noticed some minor things:
>
> > ALTER ROLE seems to support ALTER ROLE <name> ROLE <name> - but that
> > form is not mentioned in the docs:
>
> There are some cases that work, but are not documented (or supported),
> as a result of the fact that the same productions are used in the
> grammar to support both the ROLE commands and the older GROUP commands.
> I don't think it's worth bloating the grammar to suppress this.

Should we mention this in the docs along with the warning that it's
unsupported and may go away in the future?

TBH it seems like it would be better not to have hidden behaviors that
people end up using because they don't remember the supported syntax and
end up in the habit of using unsupported syntax without realizing it.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com 512-569-9461