Re: whats the deal with -u ?

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: whats the deal with -u ?
Date: 2007-12-10 00:44:08
Message-ID: 475C8BD8.90408@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>>
>>> The manual explains it:
>>> This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed. (Prompting for a
>>> non-default user name and prompting for a password because the server
>>> requires it are really two different things.) You are encouraged to look
>>> at the -U and -W options instead.
>> Hmm. The point about the forced password prompt is certainly valid,
>> but I see nothing wrong with the idea of having an option to prompt
>> for the username. What if we just took out the forced password prompt,
>> on the grounds that you can get that with "-u -W" if you want it?
>
> Yes, undeprecating it then makes sense.
>
> I have never understood what's the point of having an option to force a
> password prompt. I wonder why don't we deprecate -W?

As I recall there was a bug under very specific circumstances that a
password prompt would not appear. Thus we added the option for -W.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-12-10 00:46:29 Re: whats the deal with -u ?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-12-10 00:37:50 Re: whats the deal with -u ?