From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Andreas Pflug" <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Remote administration functionality |
Date: | 2005-08-01 14:46:00 |
Message-ID: | E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4AC96A7@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Frost [mailto:sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net]
> Sent: 01 August 2005 15:41
> To: Bruce Momjian
> Cc: Andreas Pflug; Dave Page; Tom Lane; Magnus Hagander;
> PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Remote administration functionality
>
> > > >>The problem is, pg_hba.conf might be editted via the OS
> unlike the text
> > > >>version of pg_shadow which is only editted via the
> server, which would
> > > >>make appropriate locking nigh-on impossible afaics.
>
> Alright, sorry to just jump in here in the middle, but I don't see why
> pg_hba.conf couldn't be made to work just like pg_shadow (or rather,
> pg_authid or whatever it is now :).
Because the admin doesn't edit pg_shadow using vi or some other editor,
and then possibly forget to tell the postmaster to reload it before
someone else writes a new copy via the server.
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2005-08-01 14:50:05 | Re: Remote administration functionality |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-08-01 14:45:25 | Re: Remote administration functionality |