| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: superusers are members of all roles? |
| Date: | 2011-09-12 03:29:59 |
| Message-ID: | 4E6D7CB7.3060200@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/11/2011 10:32 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andrew Dunstan (andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net) wrote:
>>> Address problem where superusers are assumed to be members of all groups
>>>
>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-04/msg00337.php
>> This turns out to be a one-liner.
> I really don't know that I agree with removing this, to be honest.. I
> haven't got time at the moment to really discuss it, but at the very
> least, not being able to 'set role' to any user when postgres would be
> REALLY annoying..
>
>
It's NOT changing that. All this affects is how +groupname is treated in
pg_hba.conf, i.e. do we treat every superuser there as being a member of
every group.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-09-12 03:43:47 | Re: psql additions |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-09-12 03:27:40 | Re: superusers are members of all roles? |