Re: Per-Database Roles

From: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Per-Database Roles
Date: 2012-05-22 15:57:57
Message-ID: 728F3649-DDCD-41AD-B152-D44C9A097508@phlo.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On May22, 2012, at 16:09 , Tom Lane wrote:
> Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> writes:
>> Conflicts would occur where localrolename matches an existing local
>> role name within the same database, or a global role name, but not a
>> local role name within another database. The problem with this,
>> however, is that creating global roles would need conflict checks
>> against local roles in every database, unless a manifest of all local
>> roles were registered globally.
>
> Yeah. The same type of issue arises for the roles' OIDs. You'd really
> want local and global roles to have nonconflicting OIDs, else it's
> necessary to carry around an indication of which type each role is;
> which would be more or less a show-stopper in terms of the number of
> catalogs and internal APIs affected. But I don't currently see any
> nice way to guarantee that if each database has a private table of
> local roles.

Maybe we could simply make all global role's OIDs even, and all local ones
odd, or something like that.

best regards,
Florian Pflug

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-05-22 15:59:24 Re: Readme of Buffer Management seems to have wrong sentence
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-05-22 15:42:55 Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE