|From:||Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>|
|To:||"Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: documentation fix for SET ROLE|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Fri, 2021-03-12 at 10:16 +0100, I wrote:
> After sleeping on it, I have come to think that it is excessive to write
> so much documentation for a feature that is that unimportant.
> It takes some effort to come up with a good use case for it.
> I think we can add a few lines to ALTER ROLE, perhaps ALTER DATABASE
> (although I don't see what sense it could make to set that on the database level),
> and briefly explain the difference between RESET ROLE and SET ROLE NONE.
> I think adding too much detail will harm - anyone who needs to know the
> exact truth can resort to the implementation.
> I'll try to come up with a proposal later.
Attached is my idea of the documentation change.
I think that ALTER DATABASE ... SET ROLE can remain undocumented, because
I cannot imagine that it could be useful.
I am unsure if specifying "role" in a libpq connect string might be
worth documenting. Can you think of a use case?
|Next Message||David G. Johnston||2021-03-12 14:45:01||Re: documentation fix for SET ROLE|
|Previous Message||Fujii Masao||2021-03-12 14:33:05||Re: shared-memory based stats collector|