From: | PG Doc comments form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | steven(dot)winfield(at)cantabcapital(dot)com |
Subject: | CREATE/ALTER ROLE with NULL password |
Date: | 2018-11-21 19:36:59 |
Message-ID: | 154282901979.1316.7418475422120496802@wrigleys.postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/sql-alterrole.html
Description:
When creating a role with no password, or altering a role to remove its
password, the ENCRYPTED clause must not be present.
The current synopsis for CREATE / ALTER ROLE give one of the allowed options
as:
[ ENCRYPTED ] PASSWORD 'password'
and the current documentation for CREATE ROLE says:
"The ENCRYPTED keyword has no effect, but is accepted for backwards
compatibility."
I think it might be worth explicitly specifying the password-blanking form
for both commands as a new option in their synopses, e.g.:
"
CREATE ROLE name [ [ WITH ] option [ ... ] ]
where option can be:
SUPERUSER | NOSUPERUSER
| CREATEDB | NOCREATEDB
...
| [ ENCRYPTED ] PASSWORD 'password' | PASSWORD NULL
...
"
Also, there is inconsistency of quoting of 'password' in the synopsis for
CREATE/ALTER ROLE (has quotes) vs. their respective parameters sections (no
quotes).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-11-21 21:56:40 | Re: Phrasing to consider (non-technical) |
Previous Message | Jürgen Purtz | 2018-11-21 12:28:07 | First SVG graphic |