* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> However, on second thought I'm not sure that this is sensible anyway.
> Consider that every role is implicitly a member of PUBLIC --- so isn't
> the above a creation of a circular membership loop, which is (for good
> reason) forbidden by the spec?

Ah, yes, you're right.  I won't claim to have considered that in the
original working of the patch though. :)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to