Re: rolcanlogin vs. the flat password file

On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 06:16:04PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> > > Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > >> I wonder if the OP was unhappy because he created a role w/ a pw and
> > >> then couldn't figure out why the user couldn't log in?
> >
> > > Hm, maybe. In that case just not filtering the entry out of the flat
> > > file would be good enough.
> >
> > I've confirmed the confusing behavior in CVS HEAD. With password auth
> > selected in pg_hba.conf:
> [...]
> > Should we just do this, or is it worth working harder?
>
> I certainly like this. Honestly, I'd also like the warning when doing a
> 'create role'/'alter role' that sets/changes the pw on an account that
> doesn't have 'rolcanlogin'. Much better to have me notice that I goof'd
> the command and fix it before telling the user 'go ahead and log in'
> than to have the user complain that it's not working. :)
>
> Just my 2c.

I think that's a good idea. Attached is a patch that implements this (I
think - haven't messed around in that area of the code before). Thoughts?

//Magnus