Re: Parsing of pg_hba.conf and authentication inconsistencies

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parsing of pg_hba.conf and authentication inconsistencies
Date: 2008-08-02 19:13:24
Message-ID: 4894B1D4.8040509@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:

>> Doesn't it seem reasonable that it should be pg_ctl? You should never
>> run postgres directly unless it is for DR.
>
> What on earth is DR?

Disaster Recovery.

>
> The problem with pg_ctl is that it's indirectly calling postgres, and it
> doesn't have a lot of a way to know what happened after calling it;
> consider the mess we have with pg_ctl -w.
>

True enough but perhaps that is a problem in itself. IMO, we should be
encouraging people to never touch the postgres binary. If that means
pg_ctl becomes a lot smarter, then we have to consider that as well.

Comparatively if I do a apachectl configtest it tells me if it is
correct. Now I assume it is actually calling httpd (I haven't checked)
but the point is, I am not calling httpd.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hans-Jürgen Schönig 2008-08-02 19:30:08 Re: Mini improvement: statement_cost_limit
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-08-02 19:01:24 Re: Parsing of pg_hba.conf and authentication inconsistencies