On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 03:10:16PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> That line of reasoning leads to the same conclusion, that another
> built-in role might be a suitable solution --- unless said role is
> so powerful that the service providers might want to block access
> to it too. Probably limiting it to manage non-superuser roles is
> good enough for that, but I'm not quite sure.
IMHO it's reasonable to expect service providers to adjust the predefined
roles if the stock limitations are not sufficient for them.
--
nathan
