Rod Taylor wrote:
> I see.. @ denotes a list of users in a file.
> Wouldn't it make more sense to simply allow groups to be specified
> (groups from pg_group)?
> In my case any group I would specify for connection purposes I've
> already created for permission purposes.
Yes, groups would be a very logical thing to have in pg_hba.conf.
Unfortunately, we don't have pg_group information available to the
The only thing I can think of is to dump the groups out as files and
enable those in pg_hba.conf, perhaps just like we allow @file includes.
I would probably use % for group names and dump them in data/global.
How does that sound?
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2002-03-19 15:22:07|
|Subject: Re: Adding usernames to pg_hba.conf |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2002-03-19 12:59:06|
|Subject: Re: Add regression tests for ADD PRIMARY KEY|