| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql/ oc/src/sgml/ref/set_session_auth.sgml r ... |
| Date: | 2002-05-10 19:23:11 |
| Message-ID: | 322.1021058591@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> I noticed you added SHOW SESSION AUTHORIZATION here as showing the
> SESSION_USER. I don't think this makes sense, because SET SESSION
> AUTHORIZATION is not the same as setting the session user only.
Well, I added the SHOW mainly so that I could test the thing more
easily, so I'm not wedded to it --- but why not? Why shouldn't
SHOW SESSION AUTHORIZATION show what you last SET? Not sure about
the distinction you are trying to draw.
> Also, in response to your comment, no, I don't think RESET all should
> reset the session user.
Fine, I didn't think so either ... though this might keep us from
folding it into the GUC variables, which was my next project in
that area...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-05-10 20:22:14 | pgsql/src/backend/tcop postgres.c |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-05-10 19:16:51 | Re: pgsql/ oc/src/sgml/ref/set_session_auth.sgml r ... |