Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Another issue is that users and roles share a namespace. We might have to > deal with that sometime, but it's not a problem as far as the information > schema is concerned.
I've been thinking for awhile that the ACL code would be simplified if userids and groupids shared a numberspace, or whatever you want to call it (ie, a given ID number cannot belong to both a user and a group). I think that implementing that would require at least a partial merge of pg_shadow and pg_group --- unless you want to get into implementing cross-table unique indexes. If we agreed that they share a namespace as well, the merge could be taken further. Perhaps more usefully, the GRANT/REVOKE syntax and the display format for ACL lists could be simplified, since there'd be no need for a syntactic marker as to whether a given name is a user or a group. Not sure how many people would complain if they couldn't have a user and a group of the same name. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly