Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 07:50:36AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Seeing the precedent with --no-blobs and --blobs, yes, that should be > enough. You may want to wait until beta1 is stamped to apply > something, though, as the period between the stamp and the tag is used > to check the state of the tarballs to-be-released. Thanks, committed. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 05:11:14AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 08:42:28AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 21.05.23 19:07, Nathan Bossart wrote: > >> How do folks feel about keeping --role undocumented? Should we give it a > >> mention in the docs for --member-of? > > > > We made a point in this release to document deprecated options consistently. > > See commit 2f80c95740. > > Alright. Does the attached patch suffice? Seeing the precedent with --no-blobs and --blobs, yes, that should be enough. You may want to wait until beta1 is stamped to apply something, though, as the period between the stamp and the tag is used to check the state of the tarballs to-be-released. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 08:42:28AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 21.05.23 19:07, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> How do folks feel about keeping --role undocumented? Should we give it a
>> mention in the docs for --member-of?
>
> We made a point in this release to document deprecated options consistently.
> See commit 2f80c95740.
Alright. Does the attached patch suffice?
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
index ba7ed1f853..5c34c62342 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
@@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
-g role
--member-of=role
+ --role=role (deprecated)
Specifies the new role should be automatically added as a member
diff --git a/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c b/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
index 2d5e2452f7..0709491185 100644
--- a/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
+++ b/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
@@ -34,8 +34,7 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[])
{"no-createdb", no_argument, NULL, 'D'},
{"echo", no_argument, NULL, 'e'},
{"encrypted", no_argument, NULL, 'E'},
- {"role", required_argument, NULL, 'g'}, /* kept for backward
- * compatibility */
+ {"role", required_argument, NULL, 'g'},
{"member-of", required_argument, NULL, 'g'},
{"host", required_argument, NULL, 'h'},
{"inherit", no_argument, NULL, 'i'},
@@ -423,6 +422,7 @@ help(const char *progname)
printf(_(" -D, --no-createdb role cannot create databases (default)\n"));
printf(_(" -e, --echoshow the commands being sent to the server\n"));
printf(_(" -g, --member-of=ROLE new role will be a member of ROLE\n"));
+ printf(_(" --role=ROLE (same as --member-of, deprecated)\n"));
printf(_(" -i, --inherit role inherits privileges of roles it is a\n"
"member of (default)\n"));
printf(_(" -I, --no-inherit role does not inherit privileges\n"));
diff --git a/src/bin/scripts/t/040_createuser.pl b/src/bin/scripts/t/040_createuser.pl
index 40452fcae3..9ca282181d 100644
--- a/src/bin/scripts/t/040_createuser.pl
+++ b/src/bin/scripts/t/040_createuser.pl
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ $node->issues_sql_like(
$node->issues_sql_like(
[ 'createuser', '--role', 'regress_user1', 'regress_user11' ],
qr/statement: CREATE ROLE regress_user11 NOSUPERUSER NOCREATEDB NOCREATEROLE INHERIT LOGIN NOREPLICATION NOBYPASSRLS IN ROLE regress_user1;/,
- '--role (for backward compatibility)');
+ '--role');
$node->issues_sql_like(
[ 'createuser', '--member-of', 'regress_user1', 'regress_user12' ],
qr/statement: CREATE ROLE regress_user12 NOSUPERUSER NOCREATEDB NOCREATEROLE INHERIT LOGIN NOREPLICATION NOBYPASSRLS IN ROLE regress_user1;/,
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On 21.05.23 19:07, Nathan Bossart wrote: How do folks feel about keeping --role undocumented? Should we give it a mention in the docs for --member-of? We made a point in this release to document deprecated options consistently. See commit 2f80c95740.
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 09:11:18AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 12:16:58PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote: >> Alright. Barring any additional feedback, I'll commit this tonight. > > v2 passes the eye test, and I am not spotting any references to the > past option names. Thanks! Committed. Thanks for taking a look. I'll keep an eye on the buildfarm for a few. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 12:16:58PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 01:20:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Nathan Bossart writes: >>> How do folks feel about keeping --role undocumented? Should we give it a >>> mention in the docs for --member-of? >> >> I'm okay with leaving it undocumented, but I won't fight about it >> if somebody wants to argue for the other. > > Alright. Barring any additional feedback, I'll commit this tonight. v2 passes the eye test, and I am not spotting any references to the past option names. Thanks! +$node->issues_sql_like( + [ 'createuser', 'regress_user11', '--role', 'regress_user1' ], + qr/statement: CREATE ROLE regress_user11 NOSUPERUSER NOCREATEDB NOCREATEROLE INHERIT LOGIN NOREPLICATION NOBYPASSRLS IN ROLE regress_user1;/, + '--role (for backward compatibility)'); Not sure I would have kept this test, still that's cheap enough to test. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 01:20:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Nathan Bossart writes: >> Fixed. > > v2 looks good to me, except the documentation wording for --with-role > is needlessly inconsistent with --with-admin. The --with-admin > wording looks better, so I suggest > > -Indicates the specified existing role should be automatically > +Specifies an existing role that will be automatically > added as a member of the new role. Multiple existing roles can Will do. >> How do folks feel about keeping --role undocumented? Should we give it a >> mention in the docs for --member-of? > > I'm okay with leaving it undocumented, but I won't fight about it > if somebody wants to argue for the other. Alright. Barring any additional feedback, I'll commit this tonight. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
Nathan Bossart writes: > Fixed. v2 looks good to me, except the documentation wording for --with-role is needlessly inconsistent with --with-admin. The --with-admin wording looks better, so I suggest -Indicates the specified existing role should be automatically +Specifies an existing role that will be automatically added as a member of the new role. Multiple existing roles can > How do folks feel about keeping --role undocumented? Should we give it a > mention in the docs for --member-of? I'm okay with leaving it undocumented, but I won't fight about it if somebody wants to argue for the other. regards, tom lane
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 11:45:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> A few comments on the patch:
Thanks for taking a look.
>>> Indicates an existing role that will be automatically added as a
>>> member of the new
>
> "Specifies" would be clearer than "indicates" (not your fault, but
> let's avoid the passive construction while we are here). Likewise
> nearby.
Fixed.
>>> + {"member-of", required_argument, NULL, 6},
>
> Why didn't you just translate this as 'g' instead of inventing
> a new switch case?
Fixed. *facepalm*
> I think clearer would be
>
>>> + printf(_(" -a, --with-admin=ROLE ROLE will be a member of new role
>>> with admin\n"
>
> Likewise
>
>>> + printf(_(" -g, --member-of=ROLE new role will be a member of
>>> ROLE\n"));
>
> (I assume that's what this should say, it's backwards ATM)
> and
>
>>> + printf(_(" -m, --with-member=ROLEROLE will be a member of new
>>> role\n"));
Fixed.
How do folks feel about keeping --role undocumented? Should we give it a
mention in the docs for --member-of?
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
index 58ed111642..448c28a056 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
@@ -82,10 +82,10 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
-a role
- --admin=role
+ --with-admin=role
-Indicates an existing role that will be automatically added as a member of the new
+Specifies an existing role that will be automatically added as a member of the new
role with admin option, giving it the right to grant membership in the
new role to others. Multiple existing roles can be specified by
writing multiple -a switches.
@@ -149,10 +149,10 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
-g role
- --role=role
+ --member-of=role
-Indicates the new role should be automatically added as a member
+Specifies the new role should be automatically added as a member
of the specified existing role. Multiple existing roles can be
specified by writing multiple -g switches.
@@ -222,10 +222,10 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
-m role
- --member=role
+ --with-member=role
-Indicates the specified existing role should be automatically
+Specifies the specified existing role should be automatically
added as a member of the new role. Multiple existing roles can
be specified by writing multiple -m switches.
diff --git a/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c b/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
index 0c7f454be5..2d5e2452f7 100644
--- a/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
+++ b/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
@@ -28,19 +28,21 @@ int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
static struct option long_options[] = {
- {"admin", required_argument, NULL, 'a'},
+ {"with-admin", required_argument, NULL, 'a'},
{"connection-limit", required_argument, NULL, 'c'},
{"createdb", no_argument, NULL, 'd'},
{"no-createdb", no_argument, NULL, 'D'},
{"echo", no_argument, NULL, 'e'},
{"encrypted", no_argument, NULL, 'E'},
- {"role", required_argument, NULL, 'g'},
+ {"role", required_argument, NULL, 'g'}, /* kept for backward
+ * compatibility */
+ {"member-of", required_argument, NULL, 'g'},
{"host", required_argument, NULL, 'h'},
{"inherit", no_argument, NULL, 'i'},
{"no-inherit", no_argument, NULL, 'I'},
{"login", no_argument, NULL, 'l'},
{"no-login", no_argument, NULL, 'L'},
- {"member", required_argument, NULL, 'm'},
+ {"with-member", required_argument, NULL, 'm'},
{"port", required_argument, NULL, 'p'},
{"pwprompt", no_argument, NULL, 'P'},
{"createrole", no_argument, NULL, 'r'},
@@ -414,19 +416,19 @@ help(const char *progname)
printf(_("Usage:\n"));
printf(_(" %s [OPTION]... [ROLENAME]\n"), progname);
printf(_("\nOptions:\n"));
- printf(_(" -a, --admin=ROLE this role will be a member of new role with admin\n"
+ printf(_(" -a, --with-admin=ROLE ROLE will be a member of new role with admin\n"
"option\n"));
printf(_(" -c, --connection-limit=N connection limit for role (default: no limit)\n"));
printf(_(" -d, --createdbrole can create new databases\n"));
printf(_(" -D, --no-createdb role cannot create databases (default)\n"));
printf(_(" -e, --echoshow the commands being sent to the server\n"));
- printf(_(" -g, --role=ROLE new role will be a member of this role\n"));
+ printf(_(" -g, --member-of=ROLE new role will be a member of ROLE\n"));
printf(_(" -i, --inherit role inherits privileges of roles it is a\n"
"member of (default)\n"));
printf(_(" -I, --no-inherit role does not inherit privileges\n"));
printf(_("
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 08:22:05AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I've attached a draft patch for this. I also changed --admin to
>> --with-admin.
> If we want to go forward with this, the big question is whether we want
> to get this in before beta1. FYI, the release notes don't mention the
> option names.
+1 for doing it before beta1.
A few comments on the patch:
>> Indicates an existing role that will be automatically added as a
>> member of the new
"Specifies" would be clearer than "indicates" (not your fault, but
let's avoid the passive construction while we are here). Likewise
nearby.
>> +{"member-of", required_argument, NULL, 6},
Why didn't you just translate this as 'g' instead of inventing
a new switch case?
>> -printf(_(" -a, --admin=ROLE this role will be a member of new
>> role with admin\n"
>> +printf(_(" -a, --with-admin=ROLE this role will be a member of new
>> role with admin\n"
I think clearer would be
>> +printf(_(" -a, --with-admin=ROLE ROLE will be a member of new role
>> with admin\n"
Likewise
>> +printf(_(" -g, --member-of=ROLE new role will be a member of
>> ROLE\n"));
(I assume that's what this should say, it's backwards ATM)
and
>> +printf(_(" -m, --with-member=ROLEROLE will be a member of new
>> role\n"));
regards, tom lane
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 08:22:05AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 07:44:49AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote: > > On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 08:00:15AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> Maybe > >> > >> createuser --with-members > >> > >> and > >> > >> createuser --member-of > >> > >> would be clearer. > > > > Those seem like reasonable choices to me. I suspect we'll want to keep > > --role around for backward compatibility. > > I've attached a draft patch for this. I also changed --admin to > --with-admin. If we want to go forward with this, the big question is whether we want to get this in before beta1. FYI, the release notes don't mention the option names. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Only you can decide what is important to you.
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 07:44:49AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 08:00:15AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Maybe
>>
>> createuser --with-members
>>
>> and
>>
>> createuser --member-of
>>
>> would be clearer.
>
> Those seem like reasonable choices to me. I suspect we'll want to keep
> --role around for backward compatibility.
I've attached a draft patch for this. I also changed --admin to
--with-admin.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
index 58ed111642..062509deb8 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
-a role
- --admin=role
+ --with-admin=role
Indicates an existing role that will be automatically added as a member of the new
@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
-g role
- --role=role
+ --member-of=role
Indicates the new role should be automatically added as a member
@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
-m role
- --member=role
+ --with-member=role
Indicates the specified existing role should be automatically
diff --git a/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c b/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
index 0c7f454be5..77cb0bb8e1 100644
--- a/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
+++ b/src/bin/scripts/createuser.c
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
static struct option long_options[] = {
- {"admin", required_argument, NULL, 'a'},
+ {"with-admin", required_argument, NULL, 'a'},
{"connection-limit", required_argument, NULL, 'c'},
{"createdb", no_argument, NULL, 'd'},
{"no-createdb", no_argument, NULL, 'D'},
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[])
{"no-inherit", no_argument, NULL, 'I'},
{"login", no_argument, NULL, 'l'},
{"no-login", no_argument, NULL, 'L'},
- {"member", required_argument, NULL, 'm'},
+ {"with-member", required_argument, NULL, 'm'},
{"port", required_argument, NULL, 'p'},
{"pwprompt", no_argument, NULL, 'P'},
{"createrole", no_argument, NULL, 'r'},
@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[])
{"interactive", no_argument, NULL, 3},
{"bypassrls", no_argument, NULL, 4},
{"no-bypassrls", no_argument, NULL, 5},
+ {"member-of", required_argument, NULL, 6},
{NULL, 0, NULL, 0}
};
@@ -123,6 +124,7 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[])
case 'E':
/* no-op, accepted for backward compatibility */
break;
+ case 6:
case 'g':
simple_string_list_append(, optarg);
break;
@@ -414,19 +416,19 @@ help(const char *progname)
printf(_("Usage:\n"));
printf(_(" %s [OPTION]... [ROLENAME]\n"), progname);
printf(_("\nOptions:\n"));
- printf(_(" -a, --admin=ROLE this role will be a member of new role with admin\n"
+ printf(_(" -a, --with-admin=ROLE this role will be a member of new role with admin\n"
"option\n"));
printf(_(" -c, --connection-limit=N connection limit for role (default: no limit)\n"));
printf(_(" -d, --createdbrole can create new databases\n"));
printf(_(" -D, --no-createdb role cannot create databases (default)\n"));
printf(_(" -e, --echoshow the commands being sent to the server\n"));
- printf(_(" -g, --role=ROLE new role will be a member of this role\n"));
+ printf(_(" -g, --member-of=ROLE new role will be a member of this role\n"));
printf(_(" -i, --inherit role inherits privileges of roles it is a\n"
"member of (default)\n"));
printf(_(" -I, --no-inherit role does not inherit privileges\n"));
printf(_(" -l, --login role can login (default)\n"));
printf(_(" -L, --no-loginrole cannot login\n"));
- printf(_(" -m, --member=ROLE this role will be a member of new role\n"));
+ printf(_(" -m, --with-member=ROLEthis role will be a member of new role\n"));
printf(_(" -P, --pwpromptassign a password to new role\n"));
printf(_(" -r, --createrole role can create new roles\n"));
printf(_(" -R, --no-createrole role cannot create roles (default)\n"));
diff --git a/src/bin/scripts/t/040_createuser.pl b/src/bin/scripts/t/040_createuser.pl
index da99d0ccb9..7530a9f007 100644
--- a/src/bin/scripts/t/040_createuser.pl
+++ b/src/bin/scripts/t/040_createuser.pl
@@ -64,4 +64,21 @@ $node->issues_sql_like(
$node->command_fails([ 'createuser', 'regress_user1' ],
'fails if role already exists');
+$node->issues_sql_like(
+ [ 'createuser', 'regress_user9', '--with-admin', 'regress_user1' ],
+ qr/statement: CREATE ROLE regress_user9 NOSUPERUSER NOCREATEDB NOCREATEROLE INHERIT LOGIN NOREPLICATION NOBYPASSRLS ADMIN regress_user1;/,
+ '--with-admin');
+$node->issues_sql_like(
+ [ 'createuser',
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 08:00:15AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Maybe > > createuser --with-members > > and > > createuser --member-of > > would be clearer. Those seem like reasonable choices to me. I suspect we'll want to keep --role around for backward compatibility. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On 15.05.23 22:11, Nathan Bossart wrote: On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 04:27:04PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 04:35:34PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: it's not intuitive whether foo becomes a member of bar or bar becomes a member of foo. Maybe something more verbose like --member-of would help? Indeed, presented like that it could be confusing, and --member-of sounds like it could be a good idea instead of --member. --member specifieѕ an existing role that will be given membership to the new role (i.e., GRANT newrole TO existingrole). IMO --member-of sounds like the new role will be given membership to the specified existing role (i.e., GRANT existingrole TO newrole). IOW a command like createuser newrole --member-of existingrole would make existingrole a "member of" newrole according to \du. Perhaps --role should be --member-of because it makes the new role a member of the existing role. Yeah, that's exactly my confusion. Maybe createuser --with-members and createuser --member-of would be clearer.
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 10:22:32PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Patch applied. Thanks, Bruce. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 01:33:26PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > In writing the PG 16 release notes, I came upon an oddity in our new > createuser syntax, specifically --role and --member. It turns out that > --role matches CREATE ROLE ... ROLE IN (and has prior to PG 16) while > the new --member option matches CREATE ROLE ... ROLE. The PG 16 feature > discussion thread is here: > > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/69a9851035cf0f0477bcc5d742b031a3%40oss.nttdata.com > > This seems like it will be forever confusing to people. I frankly don't > know why --role matching CREATE ROLE ... ROLE IN was not already > confusing in pre-PG 16. Any new ideas for improvement? > > At a minium I would like to apply the attached doc patch to PG 16 to > improve awkward wording in CREATE ROLE and createuser. Patch applied. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Only you can decide what is important to you.
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 04:27:04PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 04:35:34PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> it's not intuitive whether foo becomes a member of bar or bar becomes a >> member of foo. Maybe something more verbose like --member-of would help? > > Indeed, presented like that it could be confusing, and --member-of > sounds like it could be a good idea instead of --member. --member specifieѕ an existing role that will be given membership to the new role (i.e., GRANT newrole TO existingrole). IMO --member-of sounds like the new role will be given membership to the specified existing role (i.e., GRANT existingrole TO newrole). IOW a command like createuser newrole --member-of existingrole would make existingrole a "member of" newrole according to \du. Perhaps --role should be --member-of because it makes the new role a member of the existing role. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 04:33:27PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 09:34:42AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 02:21:22PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > >> IIRC there were a number of ideas presented in that thread but backwards > >> compatibility with --role already "taken" made it complicated, so --role > >> and > >> --member were the least bad options. > >> > >>> At a minimum I would like to apply the attached doc patch to PG 16 to > >>> improve awkward wording in CREATE ROLE and createuser. > >> > >> No objection. > > None from here as well. > > >> +role. (This in effect makes the new role a group.) > >> While not introduced here, isn't the latter part interesting enough to > >> warrant > >> not being inside parenthesis? > > > > The concept of group itself is deprecated, which I think is why the > > parenthesis are used. > > Not sure on this one. The original docs come from 58d214e, and this > sentence was already in there. True. I have removed the parenthesis in this updated patch. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Embrace your flaws. They make you human, rather than perfect, which you will never be. diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_role.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_role.sgml index 4a84461b28..7249fc7432 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_role.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_role.sgml @@ -285,10 +285,11 @@ in sync when changing the above synopsis! IN ROLE role_name -The IN ROLE clause lists one or more existing -roles to which the new role will be immediately added as a new -member. (Note that there is no option to add the new role as an -administrator; use a separate GRANT command to do that.) +The IN ROLE clause causes the new role to +be automatically added as a member of the specified existing +roles. (Note that there is no option to add the new role as an +administrator; use a separate GRANT command +to do that.) @@ -306,9 +307,9 @@ in sync when changing the above synopsis! ROLE role_name -The ROLE clause lists one or more existing -roles which are automatically added as members of the new role. -(This in effect makes the new role a group.) +The ROLE clause causes one or more specified +existing roles to be automatically added as members of the new +role. This in effect makes the new role a group. diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml index c5c74b86a2..58ed111642 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml @@ -85,11 +85,10 @@ PostgreSQL documentation --admin=role -Indicates a role that will be immediately added as a member of the new +Indicates an existing role that will be automatically added as a member of the new role with admin option, giving it the right to grant membership in the -new role to others. Multiple roles to add as members (with admin -option) of the new role can be specified by writing multiple --a switches. +new role to others. Multiple existing roles can be specified by +writing multiple -a switches. @@ -153,11 +152,10 @@ PostgreSQL documentation --role=role - Indicates a role to which this role will be added immediately as a new - member. Multiple roles to which this role will be added as a member - can be specified by writing multiple - -g switches. - +Indicates the new role should be automatically added as a member +of the specified existing role. Multiple existing roles can be +specified by writing multiple -g switches. + @@ -227,9 +225,9 @@ PostgreSQL documentation --member=role -Indicates role that will be immediately added as a member of the new -role. Multiple roles to add as members of the new role can be specified -by writing multiple -m switches. +Indicates the specified existing role should be automatically +added as a member of the new role. Multiple existing roles can +be specified by writing multiple -m switches.
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 09:34:42AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 02:21:22PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> IIRC there were a number of ideas presented in that thread but backwards >> compatibility with --role already "taken" made it complicated, so --role and >> --member were the least bad options. >> >>> At a minimum I would like to apply the attached doc patch to PG 16 to >>> improve awkward wording in CREATE ROLE and createuser. >> >> No objection. None from here as well. >> +role. (This in effect makes the new role a group.) >> While not introduced here, isn't the latter part interesting enough to >> warrant >> not being inside parenthesis? > > The concept of group itself is deprecated, which I think is why the > parenthesis are used. Not sure on this one. The original docs come from 58d214e, and this sentence was already in there. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 04:35:34PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > it's not intuitive whether foo becomes a member of bar or bar becomes a > member of foo. Maybe something more verbose like --member-of would help? Indeed, presented like that it could be confusing, and --member-of sounds like it could be a good idea instead of --member. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On 11.05.23 16:07, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 1:33 PM Bruce Momjian wrote: This seems like it will be forever confusing to people. I frankly don't know why --role matching CREATE ROLE ... ROLE IN was not already confusing in pre-PG 16. Any new ideas for improvement? Yeah, it's a bad situation. I think --role is basically misnamed. Something like --add-to-group would have been clearer, but that also has the problem of being inconsistent with the SQL command. The whole ROLE vs. IN ROLE thing is inherently quite confusing, I think. It's very easy to get confused about which direction the membership arrows are pointing. It's hard to tell that for the --member option as well. For createuser foo --member bar it's not intuitive whether foo becomes a member of bar or bar becomes a member of foo. Maybe something more verbose like --member-of would help?
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 1:33 PM Bruce Momjian wrote: > This seems like it will be forever confusing to people. I frankly don't > know why --role matching CREATE ROLE ... ROLE IN was not already > confusing in pre-PG 16. Any new ideas for improvement? Yeah, it's a bad situation. I think --role is basically misnamed. Something like --add-to-group would have been clearer, but that also has the problem of being inconsistent with the SQL command. The whole ROLE vs. IN ROLE thing is inherently quite confusing, I think. It's very easy to get confused about which direction the membership arrows are pointing. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 02:21:22PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 10 May 2023, at 19:33, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I frankly don't > > know why --role matching CREATE ROLE ... ROLE IN was not already > > confusing in pre-PG 16. Any new ideas for improvement? > > IIRC there were a number of ideas presented in that thread but backwards > compatibility with --role already "taken" made it complicated, so --role and > --member were the least bad options. > > > At a minimum I would like to apply the attached doc patch to PG 16 to > > improve awkward wording in CREATE ROLE and createuser. > > No objection. > > +role. (This in effect makes the new role a group.) > While not introduced here, isn't the latter part interesting enough to warrant > not being inside parenthesis? The concept of group itself is deprecated, which I think is why the parenthesis are used. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Embrace your flaws. They make you human, rather than perfect, which you will never be.
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
> On 10 May 2023, at 19:33, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I frankly don't > know why --role matching CREATE ROLE ... ROLE IN was not already > confusing in pre-PG 16. Any new ideas for improvement? IIRC there were a number of ideas presented in that thread but backwards compatibility with --role already "taken" made it complicated, so --role and --member were the least bad options. > At a minium I would like to apply the attached doc patch to PG 16 to > improve awkward wording in CREATE ROLE and createuser. No objection. +role. (This in effect makes the new role a group.) While not introduced here, isn't the latter part interesting enough to warrant not being inside parenthesis? -- Daniel Gustafsson
createuser --memeber and PG 16
In writing the PG 16 release notes, I came upon an oddity in our new createuser syntax, specifically --role and --member. It turns out that --role matches CREATE ROLE ... ROLE IN (and has prior to PG 16) while the new --member option matches CREATE ROLE ... ROLE. The PG 16 feature discussion thread is here: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/69a9851035cf0f0477bcc5d742b031a3%40oss.nttdata.com This seems like it will be forever confusing to people. I frankly don't know why --role matching CREATE ROLE ... ROLE IN was not already confusing in pre-PG 16. Any new ideas for improvement? At a minium I would like to apply the attached doc patch to PG 16 to improve awkward wording in CREATE ROLE and createuser. -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Embrace your flaws. They make you human, rather than perfect, which you will never be. diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_role.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_role.sgml index 4a84461b28..69ea9060bf 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_role.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_role.sgml @@ -285,10 +285,11 @@ in sync when changing the above synopsis! IN ROLE role_name -The IN ROLE clause lists one or more existing -roles to which the new role will be immediately added as a new -member. (Note that there is no option to add the new role as an -administrator; use a separate GRANT command to do that.) +The IN ROLE clause causes the new role to +be automatically added as a member of the specified existing +roles. (Note that there is no option to add the new role as an +administrator; use a separate GRANT command +to do that.) @@ -306,9 +307,9 @@ in sync when changing the above synopsis! ROLE role_name -The ROLE clause lists one or more existing -roles which are automatically added as members of the new role. -(This in effect makes the new role a group.) +The ROLE clause causes one or more specified +existing roles to be automatically added as members of the new +role. (This in effect makes the new role a group.) diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml index c5c74b86a2..58ed111642 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/createuser.sgml @@ -85,11 +85,10 @@ PostgreSQL documentation --admin=role -Indicates a role that will be immediately added as a member of the new +Indicates an existing role that will be automatically added as a member of the new role with admin option, giving it the right to grant membership in the -new role to others. Multiple roles to add as members (with admin -option) of the new role can be specified by writing multiple --a switches. +new role to others. Multiple existing roles can be specified by +writing multiple -a switches. @@ -153,11 +152,10 @@ PostgreSQL documentation --role=role - Indicates a role to which this role will be added immediately as a new - member. Multiple roles to which this role will be added as a member - can be specified by writing multiple - -g switches. - +Indicates the new role should be automatically added as a member +of the specified existing role. Multiple existing roles can be +specified by writing multiple -g switches. + @@ -227,9 +225,9 @@ PostgreSQL documentation --member=role -Indicates role that will be immediately added as a member of the new -role. Multiple roles to add as members of the new role can be specified -by writing multiple -m switches. +Indicates the specified existing role should be automatically +added as a member of the new role. Multiple existing roles can +be specified by writing multiple -m switches.
