Re: role self-revocation

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.

> > I agree. [ but we need to get consensus ]
>
> Well ... [ how about we do it my way? ]

Repeating the same argument over again isn't necessarily going to help
anything here. I read your argument and I can believe there could be a
solution along those lines, although you haven't addressed my concern
about NOINHERIT. Tom is apparently less convinced, and you know, I
think that's OK. Not everybody has to agree with the way you want to
do it.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com