On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > This is about like arguing that pg_dump and pg_upgrade should still work > after you've done "delete from pg_proc;". Superusers are assumed to > know what they're doing and not break fundamental operations.
No, it isn't like that at all. You've made that argument in the past, and it carries no water with me at all. There's no help for the fact that direct modification of the system catalog contents can fundamentally break things, but DDL commands should not. I'm willing to reserve judgment on whether ALTER DATABASE .. SET ROLE should be disallowed, or whether it should be made to not break things, but blaming the DBA for shooting himself with the loaded foot-gun we thoughtfully provided is unreasonable. And in fact it strikes me that we might not have much choice about how to fix this. I think we are not going to retroactively change the behavior of ALTER DATABASE .. SET ROLE in a released version, but yet we do, I think, want to make pg_upgrade work. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
