Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bMkWo-000783-BR for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 23:22:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bMkWn-0001La-Pf for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 23:22:17 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bMkWm-0001Kq-MR for pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 23:22:16 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bMkWj-00086x-Sc for pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 23:22:15 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u6BNMChR015763; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:22:12 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Andrew Gierth cc: "David G. Johnston" , "bossartn\@amazon.com" , "pgsql-bugs\@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: BUG #14242: Role with a setconfig "role" setting to a nonexistent role causes pg_upgrade to fail In-reply-to: <87oa633gzm.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk> References: <20160711223641.1426.86096@wrigleys.postgresql.org> <14434.1468277346@sss.pgh.pa.us> <87oa633gzm.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk> Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Gierth message dated "Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:18:06 +0100" Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:22:12 -0400 Message-ID: <15762.1468279332@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -3.2 (---) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-bugs Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-bugs-owner@postgresql.org Andrew Gierth writes: > I don't think this is documented but it has obvious uses. Does it? If the named role is the same as the actual role, then it's useless. If they're different, it seems at best confusing. In the context of ALTER DATABASE SET, it seems both confusing and possibly a security hazard. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs