út 4. 4. 2023 v 20:50 odesílatel Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> napsal:
> > > út 4. 4. 2023 v 19:55 odesílatel Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> napsal: > >> Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: >> > út 4. 4. 2023 v 18:42 odesílatel Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> napsal: >> >> Basically, I want to reject this on the grounds that it's not >> >> useful enough to justify the overhead of marking the "role" GUC >> >> as GUC_REPORT. The problems with it not going to work properly >> >> with old servers are an additional reason not to like it. >> >> > If I understand to next comment correctly, the overhead should not be >> too >> > big >> >> Yeah, but how big is the use-case? The reason I'm skeptical is that >> half the time what you're going to get is "none": >> >> $ psql >> psql (16devel) >> Type "help" for help. >> >> regression=# show role; >> role >> ------ >> none >> (1 row) >> >> That's required by SQL spec I believe, but that doesn't make it useful >> data to keep in one's prompt. >> > > Who needs it, and who uses different roles, then very quickly uses SET > ROLE TO command. > > But I fully agree so current behavior can be a little bit messy. I like > this feature, and I think it can have some benefits. Proposed > implementation is minimalistic. > > One hard problem is translation of the oid of current_user to name. It > requires an opened transaction, and then it cannot be postponed to the end > of the statement. On the other hand, when the change of role is done inside > a nested command, then it should not be visible from the client side. > > Can you accept the introduction of a new invisible GUC, that can be > modified only by SET ROLE TO command when it is executed as top command? > It was stupid idea. There can be implemented fallbacks. When the role is "none", then the :USER can be displayed instead. It can work, because the custom role "none" is not allowed (2023-04-04 21:10:25) postgres=# create role none; ERROR: role name "none" is reserved LINE 1: create role none; ? > > Regards > > Pavel > > > > > > >> >> regards, tom lane >> >
