| From: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL Development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Groups and roles |
| Date: | 2003-06-16 05:55:28 |
| Message-ID: | 0cca01c333cb$e42910a0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > I think the other requirement of roles is that they are able to own
objects.
> > ie. we need to allow groups to own objects.
>
> Hm. That seems to be another reason to unify usesysid and grosysid into
> a single unique something-id. Which probably implies unifying pg_shadow
> and pg_group into one table.
Bear in mind that I recalled that from something I thought you (or someone)
said on the list earlier and I thought you had forgotten about...
eg. I don't know that that's a requirement...
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2003-06-16 05:57:55 | Re: [HACKERS] UTF8 and KOI8 mini-howto |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-06-16 05:53:12 | Re: enumeration type? |