Re: role self-revocation

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 10:27 AM Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>> I agree that there would be a recorded relationship (that is, one that
>> we write into the catalog and keep around until and unless it's removed
>> by an admin) between creating and created roles and that's probably the
>> default when CREATE ROLE is run but, unlike tables or such objects in
>> the system, I don't agree that we should require this to exist at
>> absolutely all times for every role (what would it be for the bootstrap
>> superuser..?). At least today, that's distinct from how ownership in
>> the system works. I also don't believe that this is necessarily an
>> issue for Robert's use-case, as long as there are appropriate
>> restrictions around who is allowed to remove or modify these
>> relationships.

> I agree.

The bootstrap superuser clearly must be a special case in some way.
I'm not convinced that that means there should be other special
cases. Maybe there is a use-case for other "unowned" roles, but in
exactly what way would that be different from deeming such roles
to be owned by the bootstrap superuser?

regards, tom lane