Dimitri Fontaine <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr> writes: > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> requires_superuser isn't bad, but I think I'd rather avoid "requires" >> here since we're also using that terminology for prerequisite >> extensions. How about "must_be_superuser"?
> Sorry to continue painting in old fashioned colors, but if we're not > going to reuse established terms from our âglossaryâ, then I'd better > see us using just "superuser" here. [ shrug... ] No objection here. Going once, going twice ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers