On 1/26/2007 5:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:
>> On 1/26/2007 4:40 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
>>> It would be nice if we had a separate role for replication services
>>> so that we weren't exposing superuser so much.
>
>> So you think about another flag in pg_shadow? Would work for me.
>
> How exactly would such a role differ from a "regular" superuser? It
> would still need an awful lot of privilege bypassing ability. I'm
> pretty dubious that you could lock it down enough to make it worth the
> trouble of supporting an additional concept.
As already said in the other mail, conflict resolution means that at
some point you will be in the situation where you need a third role. The
one of the replication admin that can do things that don't replicate.
Polluting the system catalogs with flags for one specific external
system isn't my thing. The different trigger modes as well as the
snapshot cloning and the commit timestamp are all features, not
exclusively useful for the one replication system I have in mind. They
would have made my life developing Slony-I a lot easier to begin with. I
would never have needed the stupid xxid or the poking around in the
system catalog.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
