Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>> requires_superuser isn't bad, but I think I'd rather avoid "requires"
>> here since we're also using that terminology for prerequisite
>> extensions. How about "must_be_superuser"?
> Sorry to continue painting in old fashioned colors, but if we're not
> going to reuse established terms from our “glossary”, then I'd better
> see us using just "superuser" here.
[ shrug... ] No objection here. Going once, going twice ...
regards, tom lane
