Re: DROP ROLE dependency tracking ...

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
>
> > when thinking of REASSIGNED OWNED people tend to think about tables
> > rather than about CONNECT rights.
> > i would suggest to make DROP ROLE just kill the role unless there is a
> > real object depending on it.
> > i would not see a permission to be an object. what do you think?
>
> Yes, this might make some sense. (Keep in mind that db CONNECT
> privileges were invented after REASSIGN OWNED). Perhaps we could make
> exceptions -- in which case it would be good to investigate which
> exceptions we need (i.e. for all object types that we support, which
> ones we should be caring about and which ones we should ignore).
>
> I'm stuck in Canuckistan for a week still, so I expect your detailed
> proposal by when I get back home ;-)

Where are we on this issue? The original issue was CONNECT priviledges
prevented the role from being dropped.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

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