| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Thomas Hallgren <thomas(at)tada(dot)se>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, James William Pye <james(dot)pye(at)icrossing(dot)com>, Devrim GUNDUZ <devrim(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, James William Pye <pgsql(at)jwp(dot)name> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding a --quiet option to initdb |
| Date: | 2006-01-27 15:50:37 |
| Message-ID: | 2589.1138377037@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> This warning was added because of security considerations AFAIR. If the
> intent is to make initdb super-quiet, we still have to have security in
> mind. So if you want it to not say anything by default, instead of
> throwing a warning it should throw an error and refuse to continue;
> unless a default password is specified or a --silently-enable-trust-auth
> switch is passed, in either of which cases it can silently continue.
There is 0 chance that we will design initdb to fail by default.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-01-27 15:53:38 | Re: stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question) |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-01-27 15:49:34 | Re: Adding a --quiet option to initdb |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-01-27 15:56:10 | Re: Adding a --quiet option to initdb |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-01-27 15:49:34 | Re: Adding a --quiet option to initdb |