* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote: > On 2017-02-09 19:19:21 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > I'd love to nuke pg_shadow and all the other > > not-really-maintained backwards-compat things from when roles were > > added too. > > Not sure if it's worth the work to rip out and such, but I'm mildly > supportive of this one too. Depends a bit on what all the other things > are ;)
Reviewing 7762619e95272974f90a38d8d85aafbe0e94add5 where roles were
added, I find:
pg_user - use pg_roles instead, which actually includes all of the role
attributes, unlike pg_user
pg_shadow - use pg_authid instead, which, again, actually includes all
of the role attributes, unlike pg_shadow.
pg_group - use pg_auth_members instead, which includes the info about
the admin option and the grantor
I don't think we should remove things like CREATE USER, that's a
perfectly reasonable and maintained interface, unlike the above views,
which missed out on things like the 'createrole' role attribute.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
