Adam, * Adam Brightwell (adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com) wrote: > I am simply breaking this out into its own thread from the discussion on > additional role attributes ( > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20141015052259.gg28...@tamriel.snowman.net > ).
Makes sense to me, thanks. > Based on these above I have attached an initial WIP patch for review and > discussion that takes a swing at changing the catalog representation. Just a quick initial look, but I don't think we want to #include parsenodes.h into pg_authid.h. Why not put the #define ROLE_ATTR_* into pg_authid.h instead? We have similar #define's in other catalog .h's (PROARGMODE_*, RELKIND_*, etc). I'm also not a huge fan of the hard-coded 255 for the default superuser. That goes back to the other question of if we should bother having those explicitly listed at all, but I'd suggest having a #define for 'all' bits to be true (for currently used bits) and then a comment above the superuser which references that #define (we can't use the #define directly or we'd be including pg_authid.h into pg_proc.h, which isn't a good idea either; if we really want to use the #define, genbki.pl could be adjusted to find the #define similar to what it does for PGUID and PGNSP). Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature