| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-documentation <docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [HACKERS] SESSION_USER |
| Date: | 2000-04-15 18:53:01 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0004151618140.523-100000@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Tom Lane writes:
> Looking at the spec, we do seem to be missing SYSTEM_USER out of the
> four variants the spec mentions. However, considering that we map
> them all to the same thing anyway, I can't get too excited about it.
SYSTEM_USER is the operating system user that connected to the database
system. This is obviously not generally applicable in the environment
PostgreSQL runs in, nor is there a universal and reliable way to get this
information, so I suggest we don't bother about it. Mapping it to
[CURRENT_]USER would certainly be wrong.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-04-15 20:39:33 | Re: PostreSQL |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-04-15 18:50:35 | Re: Re: [HACKERS] SESSION_USER |