On 3/12/21, 6:35 AM, "Laurenz Albe" <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> wrote: > On Fri, 2021-03-12 at 10:16 +0100, I wrote: >> After sleeping on it, I have come to think that it is excessive to write >> so much documentation for a feature that is that unimportant. >> >> It takes some effort to come up with a good use case for it. >> >> I think we can add a few lines to ALTER ROLE, perhaps ALTER DATABASE >> (although I don't see what sense it could make to set that on the database >> level), >> and briefly explain the difference between RESET ROLE and SET ROLE NONE. >> >> I think adding too much detail will harm - anyone who needs to know the >> exact truth can resort to the implementation. >> >> I'll try to come up with a proposal later. > > Attached is my idea of the documentation change. > > I think that ALTER DATABASE ... SET ROLE can remain undocumented, because > I cannot imagine that it could be useful. > > I am unsure if specifying "role" in a libpq connect string might be > worth documenting. Can you think of a use case?
My main goal of this thread is to get the RESET ROLE documentation fixed. I don't have a terribly strong opinion on documenting these special uses of "role". I lean in favor of adding it, but I wouldn't be strongly opposed to simply leaving it out for now. But if we're going to add it, I think we might as well add it everywhere. Nathan
