Is there a TODO here? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Am Samstag, 25. M?rz 2006 16:10 schrieb Tom Lane: > > No, the current implementation is a compromise between exact standards > > compatibility and backwards compatibility with our historical "groups" > > behavior. I'm not really prepared to toss the latter overboard. > > My two major sticking points here are the SET ROLE command and the noinherit > feature. The SET ROLE command is not required by our historical group > behavior (because we didn't have it before) and does not do what the SQL > standard says it should do. The noinherit feature is not required by the > historical group behavior (because groups are yes-inherit) and is not in the > SQL standard either. So these two features were just mistakes as far as I > can tell. > > I'm not passing judgement on whether a command like the currently implemented > SET ROLE command or a feature like the currently implemented noinherit > feature is useful. They are just not in line with either the historical > group behavior or the SQL standard. > > -- > Peter Eisentraut > http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: 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 > -- Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
