Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> The question is why this should be tied to SET ROLE, which already has
>> well defined semantics that don't include any such behavior.
> Mostly because we don't have anywhere else to hang a "settings profile"
> than ROLEs.
So we should fix that, if we want a feature like this.
> And currently, we can define settings with roles; the fact
> that those settings materially only apply to login roles and not to
> non-login roles could even be seen as inconsistent.
[ shrug... ] The behavior of SET ROLE is defined by the standard. The
behavior at login is not.
regards, tom lane