| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: idle connection timeout ... |
| Date: | 2002-10-27 04:09:11 |
| Message-ID: | 20021027040911.GC11252@dcc.uchile.cl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 11:58:35PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 11:12:01PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > Tom's idea of doing this as part of the already added per-user/per-db
> > > settings seems like a good direction to take.
> >
> > Yes, but how? The current implementation has a setting column in
> > pg_shadow, and another in pg_database. Is the idea to create a separate
> > pg_settings table or something like that?
>
> Are you asking how to do per-db-user combination settings, like User A
> can have only two connections to database B? Seems we should get
> per-user and per-db settings working first and see if anyone needs
> combination settings.
Well, now that I think about it... the "user local to database" (those
with the @dbname appended and all that) idea may very well cover the
ground for this. But I'm not actually asking, because I don't need it.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"Aprender sin pensar es inutil; pensar sin aprender, peligroso" (Confucio)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jesus M. Milan-Franco | 2002-10-27 08:43:05 | Help compiling postgres |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-10-27 03:58:35 | Re: idle connection timeout ... |