From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Open 7.3 items |
Date: | 2002-08-28 01:08:01 |
Message-ID: | 200208280108.g7S181c00772@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > global usernames are stored just like before, e.g. postgres
> > local users are stored as user(at)dbname
> > when connecting, global users add '@' to their names
> > when connecting, local users use just their user name, no @dbname
>
> I'm OK with this in principle. But I must say I was quite confused
> because the "@" symbol appears in diametrically opposite contexts:
>
> a) designate local users on the server
>
> b) designate global users in the client
>
> Perhaps I might have been less confused if meaning (b) used a different
> character, say "username!". This might be equally confusing to the next
> person -- just my observation.
There is no question it is 100% confusing. You are not alone.
What keeps us from unconfusing it is the desire to make local usernames
clean looking, I think.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-08-28 01:45:55 | Re: LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-28 01:07:04 | Re: Open 7.3 items |