Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8AF18A9CBF for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 23:21:36 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RZDVF-0000iB-PT for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2011 03:21:35 +0000 Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id pBA3LHMW009797; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 22:21:17 -0500 (EST) To: Jaime Casanova cc: pgsql-docs Subject: Re: CREATE USER In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Jaime Casanova message dated "Fri, 09 Dec 2011 16:09:25 -0500" Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 22:21:17 -0500 Message-ID: <9796.1323487277@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Pg-Spam-Score: -3.1 (---) X-Archive-Number: 201112/27 X-Sequence-Number: 7134 Jaime Casanova writes: > I just notice that when you create a user using CREATE USER and give > the user the ability to create other users it gets created as > SUPERUSER. Are you talking about the CREATEUSER option? That is documented, quite clearly I think: CREATEUSER NOCREATEUSER These clauses are an obsolete, but still accepted, spelling of SUPERUSER and NOSUPERUSER. Note that they are not equivalent to CREATEROLE as one might naively expect! The only way we could really make this any better is to remove these keywords, which might be something to consider. The preferred SUPERUSER spelling has been accepted since 8.1 ... is that long enough to ensure everyone's converted their client-side tools? Probably not :-( regards, tom lane