> No, I didn't know that, but I figured there might be another, better way
> to do this that I hadn't found. Thanks for the info; I'm going to dig
> into ALTER USER to see what else I may be missing. Consider this patch
> "rescinded", though it was a good exercise in working with PG source
> code. If anyone cares to, I'd still like feedback on anything I could
> have done better in this patch (i.e. coding style, better place to put
> this kind of code etc.).
I have the feeling it wouldn't have been accepted because it was kind of
'arbitrary'. It's generally a good idea to ask the -hackers list first
if a patch is worth writing before actually writing it ;)
Chris
