Greetings, On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 21:35 Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 05:46:16PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > * Euler Taveira (eu...@eulerto.com) wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021, at 11:47 AM, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote: > > > > "Add predefined roles pg_read_all_data and pg_write_all_data > (Stephen Frost) > > > > > > > > These non-login roles can be used to give read or write permission > to all tables, views, and sequences." > > > > > > > > pg_read_all_data links to "Predefined roles", pg_write_all_data does > not. Is that on purpose? At least it looks strange. > > > It seems so. Once you click on the link, you will notice that > pg_write_all_data > > > is there too. Role names are similar to make the reader suspect that > both > > > descriptions will be on the same page. > > > > I tend to agree that it'd make sense to have them both as links. > > > > I've CC'd Bruce to make sure he sees this discussion. > > I normally link to only the _first_ mention of something, and since they > are both in the same section, I didn't add a link for the second one. > Adding a second link might suggest that there is more information > available, even though the coarseness of our links means that section is > the same. Perhaps the wording would be better as something like: New <a href=“…”>predefined roles</a> for granting access to read/write all tables have been added, called pg_read_all_data and pg_write_all_data ..? Or something along those lines? Just a thought. Perhaps another idea would be to make one link which includes both names. Thanks, Stephen >
