| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: pg_upgrade: document possible pg_hba.conf options |
| Date: | 2013-07-11 16:13:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20130711161310.GA29206@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 01:43:39PM +0000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > pg_upgrade: document possible pg_hba.conf options
> > Previously, pg_upgrade docs recommended using .pgpass if using MD5
> > authentication to avoid being prompted for a password. Turns out pg_ctl
> > never prompts for a password, so MD5 requires .pgpass --- document that.
> > Also recommend 'peer' for authentication too.
> > Backpatch back to 9.1.
>
> When I make a commit like this, should I send an email to hackers that
> basically duplicates this information? I assume no.
Standard operating procedure everyone follos is that you should post the
patch to -hackers first, wait a couple of hours for any possible input,
push the commit, then reply to the original -hackers thread stating you
have committed it.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-07-11 21:48:55 | Re: pgsql: pg_upgrade: document possible pg_hba.conf options |
| Previous Message | Claudio Freire | 2013-07-11 14:11:50 | Re: SSL renegotiation |