On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: >> What I'd like to know is why it rejects that at all. What's the point >> of having roles you can't SET to? > > To use them to GRANT access to other roles, which was the goal of the > default roles system to begin with.
Well ... yeah. But that doesn't mean it should be impossible to SET to that role itself. I'm a little worried that could create strange corner cases. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
