Based on the discussion so far, it seems to me that the sane course of
action is to continue to register the grantor, because the standard
mandates that it should be there; but ignore the parts where we revoke
selectively, because that's a stupid thing to do.  So we do deviate, if

So we will have pg_dumpall do nothing special if the grantor has gone
away since granting the privilege.  That is, exactly the patch that was
submitted, no new code needs to be written.  (Maybe a mention in the
"compatibility" section of REVOKE is warranted, though I'm not sure).

Does anyone object to this course of action?

Alvaro Herrera                      
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to