On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 10:32 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 8:18 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > > > I couldn't find any discussion of the idea of adding "(s)" to the > > > variable name in order to mark the variable userset in the catalog, and > > > I have to admit I find it a bit strange. Are we really agreed that > > > that's the way to proceed? > > > > I hadn't been paying close attention to this thread, sorry. > > > > I agree that that seems like a very regrettable choice, > > especially if you anticipate having to bump catversion anyway. > > I totally understand that this change requires a catversion bump. > I've reflected this in the commit message. > > > Better to add a bool column to the catalog. > > What about adding a boolean array to the pg_db_role_setting? So, > pg_db_role_setting would have the following columns. > * setdatabase oid > * setrole oid > * setconfig text[] > * setuser bool[]
The revised patch implements this way for storage USER SET flag. I think it really became more structured and less cumbersome. ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov
0001-Add-USER-SET-parameter-values-for-pg_db_role_sett-v8.patch
Description: Binary data
