* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > The non-documentation question is around DROP OWNED.  We need to either
> > have policies dropped by DROP OWNED (well, roles removed, unless it's
> > the last one, in which case the policy should be dropped), or update the
> > documentation to reflect that they don't.  I had been thinking we'd
> > fix DROP OWNED to deal with the policies, but if folks feel it's too
> > late for that kind of a change, then we can simply document it.  I don't
> > believe that's unreasonable for a new feature and we can work to get it
> > addressed in 9.6.
> DROP OWNED is documented as a mechanism to help you drop the role, so
> it should do whatever is needed for that.  I don't think documenting the
> fact that it leaves the user as part of policies is good enough.

We already can't take care of everything with DROP OWNED though, since
we can't do cross-database queries, and the overall process almost
certainly requires additional effort (to reassign objects, etc...), so
while I'd be happier if policies were handled by it, I don't think it's
as serious of an issue.

Still, I'll get a patch worked up for it and then we can discuss the
merits of that patch going in to 9.5 now versus just into HEAD.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to