Re: Proposal: DROP ROLE ... REASSIGN OWNED TO ... - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Proposal: DROP ROLE ... REASSIGN OWNED TO ...
Date
Msg-id 1861860.1777079576@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread
In response to Re: Proposal: DROP ROLE ... REASSIGN OWNED TO ...  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> This would fail if the user to be dropped owned objects in another
> database, but your hypothetical version of DROP ROLE would have that
> issue, too. Even if you couldn't wrap both commands in a single
> transaction -- we have some DDL commands that are like that -- running
> them one after another wouldn't lose much. So I'm just not sure I
> really see the point.

Yeah.  We intentionally separated this functionality because the
expectation is that you'll likely have to do REASSIGN OWNED in
multiple databases before DROP ROLE will succeed.  So I'm not
much in favor of adding a combined command; it will just lead
people to try to do things that won't work.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zach Manifold
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: DROP ROLE ... REASSIGN OWNED TO ...
Next
From: jian he
Date:
Subject: COPY ON_CONFLICT TABLE; save duplicated record to another table.