From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Should we remove db_user_namespace?
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2023 17:29:04 -0400
Message-ID: <ZJ9JILgzHoHDKX6d@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230630200509.GA2830328@nathanxps13>
References: <20230630200509.GA2830328@nathanxps13>
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 01:05:09PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I think this is the second decennial thread [0] for removing this GUC.
> This topic came up at PGCon, so I thought I'd start the discussion on the
> lists.
>
> I'm personally not aware of anyone using this parameter. A couple of my
> colleagues claimed to have used it in the aughts, but they also noted that
> users were confused by the current implementation, and they seemed
> generally in favor of removing it. AFAICT the strongest reason for keeping
> it is that there is presently no viable replacement. Does this opinion
> still stand? If so, perhaps we can look into adding a viable replacement
> for v17.
I am the original author, and it was a hack designed to support
per-database user names. I am fine with its removal.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: bruce@momjian.us, nathandbossart@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Should we remove db_user_namespace?
In-Reply-To: <ZJ9JILgzHoHDKX6d@momjian.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox