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

Re: [GENERAL] Missing variable "role" in "pg_settings"?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Missing variable "role" in "pg_settings"?
Date: 2005-12-06 05:42:05
Message-ID: 26127.1133847725@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackerspgsql-general
"Florian G. Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Based on this email, should we be showing ROLE from SHOW ALL?
>> Only if you think we should be showing session_authorization too.
>> That was marked "no_show_all" quite a long time ago, and we have
>> not got complaints about it...

> Hm, but before 8.1 there was no "alter user set <variable> <value>", was
> there? So, a automatic way of retrieving all possible variables wasn't
> too important - at least not from a gui-tool perspektive..

I don't see the connection offhand ... but ALTER USER SET <variable>
has been around since 7.3, so this doesn't seem to support whatever
argument you intended to make.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Freddy91 (sent by Nabble.com)Date: 2005-12-06 10:57:57
Subject: Re: Slony in pgAdmin
Previous:From: Andreas PflugDate: 2005-12-05 23:19:31
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Missing variable "role" in "pg_settings"?

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Michael FuhrDate: 2005-12-06 05:51:12
Subject: Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-12-06 04:59:10
Subject: Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508

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