On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 11:34:09AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost <[email protected]> writes:
> > If that's the only consideration for this, well, that's certainly quite
> > straight-forward to change in the other direction too. The new function
> > suggested by Andres actually makes it really easy to get a textual list
> > of all the role attributes which a role has from the bitmask too.
>
> We could have that regardless of the representation, if the function is
> defined along the lines of "given a user OID, give me a text string
> representing the user's attributes". However, that only helps for
> pg_dumpall and any other clients whose requirement is exactly satisfied
> by a string that fits into CREATE/ALTER USER. The current formatting
> of psql's \du, for example, absolutely requires adding more client-side
> code every time we add a property; whether the catalog representation is
> bools or a bitmask really isn't going to change the pain level much there.
I am with Tom on this --- there is more wasted space in the 'name'
column pg_authid.rolname than by shoving 40 boolean values into a
bitmap. Adding the complexity of a bitmap doesn't make sense here. I
also apologize for the late feedback.
Offtopic, what I would really _love_ to see improved is our display of
object permissions:
Access privileges
Schema | Name | Type | Access privileges | Column
privileges | Policies
--------+--------+-------+---------------------------+-------------------+----------
public | crypto | table | postgres=arwdDxt/postgres+|
|
| | | =r/postgres |
|
That is nasty user display --- it looks like line noise.
--
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
