* Robert Treat ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Friday 01 July 2005 13:07, Stephen Frost wrote: > However On Friday 01 July 2005 13:02, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Bruce Momjian (pgman@candle.pha.pa.us) wrote: > > > Stupid question, but how do roles relate to our existing "groups"? > > > > Uhhh. There are no longer "groups", they've been replaced with roles > > (which can have members). > > > > Was following this conversation up till now, because these two statement seem > to contradict each other. Do we really support groups still, are is CREATE > GROUP now syntactical sugar for some for of CREATE ROLE.
CREATE GROUP just does a CREATE ROLE now, yeah. You can check gram.y
for the details if you'd like. We do still support \du and \dg
(pg_users and pg_groups respectively, iirc) for backwards compat. and to
help folks get used to the new stuff.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
