Re: new createuser option for replication role

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Cédric Villemain <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: new createuser option for replication role
Date: 2011-09-26 08:55:50
Message-ID: CAHGQGwG=JxwUdqWrNbzDos_er1Pd25f=OW=wgMUUT7vSK54pTQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Cédric Villemain
<cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 2011/9/23 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Agreed. Attached is the updated version of the patch. It adds two options
>>> --replication and --no-replication. If neither specified, neither REPLICATION
>>> nor NOREPLICATION is specified in CREATE ROLE, i.e., in this case,
>>> replication privilege is granted to only superuser.
>>
>> Committed.  Do we need to make any changes in interactive mode, when
>> we prompt?  In theory this could be either wanted or not wanted for
>> either superusers or non-superusers, but I'm not really sure it's
>> worth it, and I certainly don't want the command to go into
>> interactive mode just because neither --replication nor
>> --no-replication was specified.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I believe the intereactive mode is useless.

Agreed. I think that a majority of "createuser" users are not interested
in REPLICATION privilege yet.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kohei KaiGai 2011-09-26 09:08:15 Re: contrib/sepgsql regression tests are a no-go
Previous Message Jun Ishiduka 2011-09-26 08:41:06 Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby