Hello, At Thu, 30 Apr 2015 17:12:25 -0300, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote in <20150430201225.gv4...@alvh.no-ip.org> > Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > Thank you for completing this and very sorry not to respond these > > days. > > > > I understood that it is committed after I noticed that rebasing > > my code failed.. > > You'd do well to check your email, I guess :-)
Yeah, I agree with you since I noticed that before I read the mail mentioning that. I should be more carefull:( Sorry to bother you and thank you for your kindness. > > | =# alter role current_user rename to "PubLic"; > > | ERROR: CURRENT_USER cannot be used as a role name > > | LINE 1: alter role current_user rename to "PubLic"; > > | ^ > > > > The error message sounds somewhat different from the intention. I > > think the following message would be clearer. > > > > | ERROR: CURRENT_USER cannot be used as a role name here > > Okay, changed. > > > > ==== > > The document sql-altergroup.html says > > > > | ALTER GROUP role_specification ADD USER user_name [, ... ] > > > > But current_user is also usable in user_name list. So the doc > > should be as following, but it would not be necessary to be fixed > > because it is an obsolete commnand.. > > > > | ALTER GROUP role_specification ADD USER role_specification [, ... ] > > Yeah, EDONTCARE. > > > "ALTER GROUP role_spec ADD/DROP USER role_spec" is naturally > > denied so I think no additional description is needed. > > +1 > > > ==== > > sql-alterpolicy.html > > > > "ALTER POLICY name ON table_name TO" also accepts current_user > > and so as the role to which the policy applies. > > Changed. > > > # As a different topic, the syntax "ALTER POLICY <pname> ON > > # <tname> TO <user>" looks a bit wired, it might be better be to > > # be "ON <tname> APPLY TO <user>" but I shouldn't try to fix it > > # since it is a long standing syntax.. > > Yeah, it's a bit strange. Not a strong opinion. Maybe you should raise > it as a separate thread. > > > ==== > > sql-createtablespace.html > > sql-drop-owned.html, sql-reassign-owned.html > > Changed. Thank you applying the changes above. > > ====== > > sql-grant.html, sql-revoke.html, > > > > "GRANT <roles> TO <roles>" and "REVOKE <roles> FROM <roles>" are > > the modern equivalents of the deprecated syntaxes "ALTER <roles> > > ADD USER <roles>" and "ALTER <roles> DROP USER <roles>" > > respectively. But the current parser infrastructure doesn't allow > > coexistence of the two following syntaxes but I couldn't find the > > way to their coexistence. > > I decided to leave this out. I think we should consider it as a new > patch for 9.6; these changes aren't as clear-cut as the rest of your > patch. I didn't want to have to research the ecpg changes. Ok, it sounds fair enough. regards, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
