| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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 14:51:21 |
| Message-ID: | 20050801145121.GC6026@ns.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Dave Page (dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk) wrote:
> > 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.
This isn't actually an argument against my proposal. The admin doesn't
edit pg_shadow using vi because it's understood to be 'owned' by the
database. The same would be true of 'pg_hba' in my solution.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2005-08-01 14:52:00 | Re: Remote administration functionality |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2005-08-01 14:50:05 | Re: Remote administration functionality |