Re: CREATE/ALTER ROLE PASSWORD ('value' USING 'method')

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 03/07/2017 08:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> >>> here is a separate thread dedicated to the following extension for
> >>> CREATE/ALTER ROLE: PASSWORD ('value' USING 'method').
> >>
> >> The parentheses seem weird ... do we really need those?
> >
> > +1
>
> Seeing 3 opinions in favor of that, let's do so then. I have updated
> the patch to not use parenthesis.
>

The regression tests only exercise the CREATE ROLE...USING version, not the
ALTER ROLE...USING version.

+ and <literal>plain</> for an non-hashed password. If the password
+ string is already in MD5-hashed or SCRAM-hashed, then it is
+ stored hashed as-is.

In the last line, I think "stored as-is" sounds better.

Other than that, it looks good to me.

Cheers,

Jeff