Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Because of the problems that were pointed out, I'm inclined to remove the
> pg_pwd updating trigger again.
Actually, what I'd like to see is a fix that makes the trigger robust.
Maybe that's too much work for 7.0.
If we had a robust solution for this problem, then we could apply the
same method to export a flat-file equivalent of pg_database, which could
be read during backend startup. That would allow us to get rid of some
incredibly grotty (and not 100% reliable) code that tries to read
pg_database before the transaction management code has been fired up :-(
> My new take on the situation is actually that there shouldn't be a reason
> to tinker with the systems catalogs period.
Maybe so, but we still could make good use of an end-of-transaction
trigger to update pg_pwd from pg_shadow. Right now, rollback of a
pg_shadow update doesn't really work right even if you did it via
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-03-08 00:32:10|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 'LIKE' enhancement suggestion |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2000-03-08 00:17:51|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block|