Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jo0WT-0004LB-IP for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 08:12:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jo0WS-0001uF-Gf for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 08:12:44 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jo0WS-0001u8-9a for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 08:12:44 +0000 Received: from relay7-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.200]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jo0WP-00045j-Vx for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 08:12:43 +0000 X-Originating-IP: 93.10.30.82 Received: from [172.16.255.146] (82.30.10.93.rev.sfr.net [93.10.30.82]) (Authenticated sender: vik@postgresfriends.org) by relay7-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 91DA220004; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 08:12:39 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Allow CURRENT_ROLE in GRANTED BY To: Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-hackers References: From: Vik Fearing Message-ID: Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:12:38 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On 6/24/20 8:35 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I was checking some loose ends in SQL conformance, when I noticed: We > support GRANT role ... GRANTED BY CURRENT_USER, but we don't support > CURRENT_ROLE in that place, even though in PostgreSQL they are > equivalent.  Here is a trivial patch to add that. The only thing that isn't dead-obvious about this patch is the commit message says "[PATCH 1/2]". What is in the other part? Assuming that's just a remnant of development, this LGTM. -- Vik Fearing