On 1/10/24 08:59, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 2:56 PM Bertrand Drouvot
I think it depends what we want the new field to reflect. If it is the exact
same thing as the SYSTEM_USER then I think it has to be text (as the SYSTEM_USER
is made of "auth_method:identity"). Now if we want it to be "only" the identity
part of it, then the `name` datatype would be fine. I'd vote for the exact same
thing as the SYSTEM_USER (means auth_method:identity).
I definitely think it should be the same. If it's not exactly the
same, then it should be *two* columns, one with auth method and one
with the name.
And thinking more about it maybe that's cleaner, because that makes it
easier to do things like filter based on auth method?
+1 for the overall feature and +1 for two columns
> + <row>
> + <entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para role="column_definition">
> + <structfield>authname</structfield> <type>name</type>
> + </para>
> + <para>
> + The authentication method and identity (if any) that the user
> + used to log in. It contains the same value as
> + <xref linkend="system-user" /> returns in the backend.
> + </para></entry>
> + </row>
I'm fine with auth_method:identity.
> + S.authname,
What about using system_user as the field name? (because if we keep
auth_method:identity it's not really the authname anyway).
I was worried system_user or sysuser would both be confusing with the
fact that we have usesysid -- which would reference a *different*
sys...
I think if it is exactly "system_user" it would be pretty clearly a
match for SYSTEM_USER
--
Joe Conway
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
