Re: Role incompatibilities

Is there a TODO here?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Samstag, 25. M?rz 2006 16:10 schrieb Tom Lane:
> > No, the current implementation is a compromise between exact standards
> > compatibility and backwards compatibility with our historical "groups"
> > behavior. I'm not really prepared to toss the latter overboard.
>
> My two major sticking points here are the SET ROLE command and the noinherit
> feature. The SET ROLE command is not required by our historical group
> behavior (because we didn't have it before) and does not do what the SQL
> standard says it should do. The noinherit feature is not required by the
> historical group behavior (because groups are yes-inherit) and is not in the
> SQL standard either. So these two features were just mistakes as far as I
> can tell.
>
> I'm not passing judgement on whether a command like the currently implemented
> SET ROLE command or a feature like the currently implemented noinherit
> feature is useful. They are just not in line with either the historical
> group behavior or the SQL standard.
>
> --
> Peter Eisentraut
> http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>

--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +