From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Postgresql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: TODO list |
Date: | 2003-12-17 22:45:39 |
Message-ID: | 13986.1071701139@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> case 6 - limit all users' connections regardless of database:
> limit all all n
That's called max_connections. Don't think we need a redundant
implementation of same ...
Another little nitpick is that I don't like assuming that "any" and
"all" are never going to be used as database or user names. (I know
that pg_hba.conf already uses "all" this way, and IMHO that was a bogus
decision. Something like "*" would have been less likely to collide.)
On an implementation level, where are you thinking of enforcing this?
pg_hba.conf would not be very appropriate for the most likely place to
put it, which is in backend startup shortly after establishing a PGPROC
entry (with the data about numbers of active connections obtained by
scanning the PGPROC array for other backends connected to the same
database or with the same userid). I think we've thrown away the
PostmasterContext long before that, so we couldn't use cached
pg_hba.conf data without some redesign of the startup sequence.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Felstead | 2003-12-17 22:53:46 | Re: TODO list |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2003-12-17 22:41:41 | Re: OLAP CUBE/ROLLUP Operators and GROUP BY grouping sets |