On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
>> The problem here is that you suggest NOLOGIN should mean "Not allowed
>> to issue SQL commands", which really isn't what the name "NOLOGIN"
> No, it means "not allowed to connect". It's possible now to issue
> commands as a NOLOGIN user, you just have to use SET ROLE to become the
> user. I think you're arguing about a design choice that was already
> made some time ago.
I think I agree with Florian about the confusing-ness of the proposed
semantics. Aren't you saying you want NOLOGIN mean "not allowed to
log in for the purposes of issuing SQL commands, but allowed to log in
for replication"? Uggh.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-12-24 04:35:26|
|Subject: pg_dump -X|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-12-24 04:00:14|
|Subject: Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions |