| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Recognizing superuser in pg_hba.conf |
| Date: | 2019-12-29 16:48:19 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY5XoSsdGTzKXdRjPXApjDiU_Uad2TBWT6nzi7T5kyjKw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 11:31 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I don't have any particular objection to '&' if people prefer that.
> But ':' seems like it would introduce confusion with the
> variable-substitution notation used in psql and some other places.
>
> It's not that hard to imagine that somebody might want a
> variable-substitution notation in pg_hba.conf someday, so we should
> leave syntax room for one, and ':' seems like a likely choice
> for it (although I suppose a case could be made for '$' too).
Well, as I say, I don't care very much... I hope we can agree on
something and move forward.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chapman Flack | 2019-12-29 16:50:15 | Re: Greatest Common Divisor |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-12-29 16:31:34 | Re: Recognizing superuser in pg_hba.conf |