* Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> > * Stephen Frost (sfrost@snowman.net) wrote:
> >> I should have been more specific. I don't believe they've moved to
> >> using pg_roles completely (which was created specifically to address the
> >> issue that regular users can't select from pg_authid).
> >
> > Err, forgot to finish that thought, sorry. Let's try again:
> >
> > I should have been more specific. I don't believe they've moved to
> > using pg_roles completely (which was created specifically to address the
> > issue that regular users can't select from pg_authid) simply because
> > they haven't had reason to.
>
> That's another way of saying "removing pg_user would be creating extra
> work for tool authors that otherwise wouldn't need to be done".
Sure, if we never deprecate anything then tool authors would never need
to change their existing code. I don't think that's actually a viable
solution though; the reason we're discussing the removal of these
particular views is that they aren't really being maintained and, when
they are, they're making work for us. That's certainly a trade-off to
consider, of course, but in this case I'm coming down on the side of
dropping support and our own maintenance costs associated with these
views in favor of asking the tooling community to complete the migration
to the new views which have been around for the past 10 years.
Thanks!
Stephen
