On 30/04/15 12:20, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:

I think that if you commit this the way you have it today, everybody
will go, oh, look, Stephen committed something, but it looks
complicated, I won't pay attention.
Yeah, that sucks.

Finally, you've got the idea of making pg_ a reserved prefix for
roles, adding some predefined roles, and giving them some predefined
privileges.  That should be yet another patch.
On this part I have a bit of a problem -- the prefix is not really
reserved, is it.  I mean, evidently it's still possible to create roles
with the pg_ prefix ... otherwise, how come the new lines to
system_views.sql that create the "predefined" roles work in the first
place?  I think if we're going to reserve role names, we should reserve
them for real: CREATE ROLE should flat out reject creation of such
roles, and the default ones should be created during bootstrap.

IMO anyway.

What if I had a company with several subsidiaries using the same database, and want to prefix roles and other things with the subsidiary's initials? (I am not saying this would be a good architecture!!!)

For example if one subsidiary was called 'Perfect Gentleman', so I would want roles prefixed by 'pg_' and would be annoyed if I couldn't!


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to