Re: Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 12:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is there a better way to handle all this? It may be too late to rethink
>> dblink's behavior anyhow, but perhaps it's not too late to change
>> postgres_fdw. I think though that once we let 9.3 out the door, it
>> *will* be too late to make any major changes, because postgres_fdw's
>> usage is going to go through the roof now that it can do remote updates.

> The first thing that occurs to me is to have postgres_fdw install some
> GUCs with reasonable defaults.

If there's anything I've learned in the last dozen years, it's that GUCs
with application-visible semantic effects are dangerous. If the
semantic effects are relevant to security, that's probably even worse.

> Perhaps the default could be a magic value that is replaced by the
> current user or something (similar to search_path).

That seems like just an overcomplicated form of my suggestion that the
default should be the current user's name.

regards, tom lane