| 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 14:56:27 |
| Message-ID: | 20050801145627.GD6026@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:
> > 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.
>
> Only if it were moved to a different location and renamed. Otherwise
> people would be bound to try to edit it as that is what they have done
> for years.
Sure, it could be moved/renamed to avoid confusion. Seems like alot
better than having the database try to deal with user-editable files,
which are in a format that's intended to be user-editable though.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2005-08-01 15:02:33 | Re: Remote administration functionality |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2005-08-01 14:53:27 | Re: Remote administration functionality |