Re: alter user/role CURRENT_USER

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com, sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net, marti(at)juffo(dot)org, rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: alter user/role CURRENT_USER
Date: 2015-03-09 18:50:32
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> With this patch applied, doing
> in psql looks quite odd: note how wide it has become. Maybe we should
> be doing this differently? (Hmm, why don't we accept ALL in the first SET
> line? Maybe that's just a mistake and the four lines should be all
> identical in the first half ...)

I have fixed the remaining issues, completed the doc changes, and
pushed. Given the lack of feedback I had to follow my gut on the best
way to change the docs. I added the regression test you submitted with
some additional changes, mainly to make sure they don't fail immediately
when other databases exist; maybe some more concurrency or platform
issues will show up there, but let's see what the buildfarm says.

Thanks Horiguchi-san for the patch and everyone for the reviews. (It's
probably worthwhile giving things an extra look.)

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-03-09 18:54:18 Re: Calling for a replacement committer for GROUPING SETS
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-03-09 18:33:54 Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit