Re: Open 7.3 items

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Open 7.3 items
Date: 2002-08-01 20:01:49
Message-ID: 17223.1028232109@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> (Actually, what I'd prefer it do is try first for username, and
>> then username(at)databasename if plain username isn't found.)

> Yes, that would be very easy to do _except_ for pg_hba.conf which does a
> first-match for username. We could get into trouble there by trying two
> versions of the same name. Comments?

Hm. I think we'd have to switch around the order of stuff so that we
look at the flat-file copy of pg_shadow first. Then we'd know which
flavor of name we have, and we can proceed with the pg_hba match.

The reason it's worth doing this is that 'postgres', for example, should
be an installation-wide username even when you're using db-local names
for ordinary users.

> This may require raising the length of NAME type to be backwards
> compatible.
>>
>> Right, but we're planning to do that anyway.

> Yes, but that requires a protocol change, which we don't want to do for
> 7.3.

What? We've been discussing raising NAMEDATALEN for months, and no
one's claimed that it qualifies as a protocol version change.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleg Bartunov 2002-08-01 20:02:00 Re: Module Portability
Previous Message Paul Ramsey 2002-08-01 20:01:15 Module Portability