> On Feb 1, 2022, at 1:10 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
> The whole 'NOFOO WITH ADMIN OPTION'
> thing seems to me a bit like a POLA violation. Nevertheless I can
> probably live with it as long as it's *really* well documented. Even so
> I suspect it would be too complex for many, and they will just continue
> to use superusers to create and manage roles if possible.
I agree with the sentiment, but it might help to distinguish between surprising
behavior vs. surprising grammar.
In existing postgresql releases, having CREATEROLE means you can give away most
attributes, including ones you yourself don't have (createdb, login). So we
already have the concept of NOFOO WITH ADMIN OPTION, we just don't call it
that. In pre-v8 patches on this thread, I got rid of that; you *must* have the
attribute to give it away. But maybe that was too restrictive, and we need a
way to specify, attribute by attribute, how this works. Is this just a problem
of surprising grammar? Is it surprising behavior? If the latter, I'm inclined
to give up this WIP as having been a bad move. If the former, I'll try to
propose some less objectionable grammar.
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
