From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Per-Database Roles |
Date: | 2012-05-26 04:18:54 |
Message-ID: | 11224.1338005934@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
>> Eh? Why would the presence of usernames in pg_hba.conf mean that they
>> have to be global objects?
> I havn't had a chance (yet) to look, but perhaps the current code
> attempts to validate the role before figuring out what database is being
> requested? We'd have to essentially invert that, of course, for this..
Even more to the point, what do you do when the "database" column is
"all", or a list of more than one database name?
It's possible that we could define this away by saying that only
globally known usernames can be listed in pg_hba.conf, but I think
we'll still have implementation problems with doing authentication
for per-database usernames.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-05-26 04:45:35 | Re: No, pg_size_pretty(numeric) was not such a hot idea |
Previous Message | Jeff Frost | 2012-05-26 04:13:44 | Re: Backends stalled in 'startup' state: index corruption |