Re: Reverting SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION command

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reverting SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION command
Date: 2002-03-11 01:41:07
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0203102040030.684-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Fernando Nasser writes:

> The SQL standard has already defined what should go there.
> That would be CURRENT_USER, so you would have:
>
> SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION CURRENT_USER

I don't think so. SET SESSION AUTHORIZATON sets the current user, so the
identity of the original current user is lost (or at least it's not
available through the CURRENT_USER function).

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2002-03-11 01:53:02 Re: Do we still have locking problems with concurrent
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2002-03-11 01:37:43 Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names