On 8/20/12 4:17 PM, David Johnston wrote: > The issue with adding the PostgreSQL role to the database in this way is > that you now can never delete that role or reassign it to another entity. I > guess with temporal you could do so and basically have the identity-role > relationship define over specific periods of time... I can (have) imagine a > whole level of indirection and association to be able to reasonably handle > assigning and storing permanent identities while allowing logon credentials > to remain outside of permanent storage.
This is sounding like a completely runaway spec on what should be a simple feature. If you want something in core which will be useful to a lot of our users, it needs to be simple and flexible. Not ornate with lots of dependancies. The first version of it should be as simple and minimalist as possible. Personally, I would prefer a tool which just made it simpler to build my own triggers, and made it automatic for the history table to track changes in the live table. I think anything we build which controls what goes into the history table, etc., will only narrow the user base. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
