| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeroen Vermeulen <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Indent authentication overloading |
| Date: | 2010-11-17 17:14:25 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinZtZQpyzkDc7wSv7V6FPTwEX3GfjabSZLyWDzJ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 17:10, Jeroen Vermeulen <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> wrote:
> On 2010-11-17 22:43, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> at the advantage of not confusing new users. We could of course also
>> just drop ident-over-tcp completely, but there might be some poor guy
>> out there who actually *uses* it :-)
>
> As far as I know, companies do use it in their internal networks where they
> do have a reasonable shot at full control over ident connections. I don't
> know how easy it would be for them to switch to other methods.
Yea, I think deleting it is going a bit overboard.
If it was a matter of changing it for those who use ident over tcp, I
really wouldn't hesitate - they're few :-) But the problem is that
it's the ident-over-tcp that's correctly named, not the other one...
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-11-17 17:14:47 | Re: unlogged tables |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-11-17 16:52:54 | Re: changing MyDatabaseId |