From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Mike Nolan <nolan(at)gw(dot)tssi(dot)com>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alex <alex(at)meerkatsoft(dot)com>, Frank Finner <postgresql(at)finner(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PG vs MySQL |
Date: | 2004-03-29 21:36:46 |
Message-ID: | 8979.1080596206@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> And while we're at it, maybe we should have a setting somewhere should
> someone execute the famous "update pg_shadow set usesuper = false" that
> someone did a while back to be able to force an account to be a superuser
> account.
We already have an adequate solution for that one: shut down the
postmaster and run a standalone backend. You are always superuser in
a standalone backend, so you can create a new superuser or just reverse
the UPDATE command.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2004-03-29 21:42:25 | Re: PG vs MySQL |
Previous Message | Mike Nolan | 2004-03-29 21:32:29 | Re: PG vs MySQL |