| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Group and Role Disagreement |
| Date: | 2009-12-31 23:54:31 |
| Message-ID: | FDFFA318-7F94-4835-B0B2-971E646D2A79@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Dec 31, 2009, at 3:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> My question is: why is the group membership of the foo_bar, foo_baz,
>> and foo_yow roles not reflected in pg_group?
>
> Per the fine manual:
>
> The view pg_group exists for backwards compatibility: it emulates a
> catalog that existed in PostgreSQL before version 8.1. It shows the
> names and members of all roles that are marked as not rolcanlogin, which
> is an approximation to the set of roles that are being used as groups.
Ah, hadn't noticed that, thanks for the pointer to TFM.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-01-01 00:18:02 | Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-31 23:41:35 | Re: Group and Role Disagreement |