Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> writes: > On 6/22/22 10:51, Tom Lane wrote: >> My immediate guess would be that the SQL committee only intends >> to deal in SQL role names and therefore SYSTEM_USER is defined >> to return one of those, but I've not gone looking in the spec >> to be sure.
> I only have a draft copy, but in SQL 2016 I find relatively thin > documentation for what SYSTEM_USER is supposed to represent: > The value specified by SYSTEM_USER is equal to an > implementation-defined string that represents the > operating system user who executed the SQL-client > module that contains the externally-invoked procedure > whose execution caused the SYSTEM_USER <general value > specification> to be evaluated. Huh. Okay, if it's implementation-defined then we can define it as "whatever auth.c put into authn_id". Objection withdrawn. regards, tom lane