From: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Remote administration functionality |
Date: | 2005-08-01 14:04:01 |
Message-ID: | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE6C77F1@algol.sollentuna.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > > I am thinking we will need load_pg_hba() and write_pg_hba() that
> > > will load and write the table to pg_hba.conf.
> >
> > Yeah, that bit is straghtforward enough, but what about the
> situation
> > where dba #1 updates the pg_hba table, at the same time as
> dba #2 is
> > editting pg_hba.conf in vi?
>
> I don't see any way to fix that. The hope is that the
> administrator has enough control that this isn't happenening
> --- it could already happen now if who people edit the same
> file with different editors/locking systems.
The difference is that if the other admin edited it in vi *last week* it
will still break with your way, unless every admin always rembers to do
load_pg_hba() before doing *anything at all*.
I fail to see how this is better than just editing the file. Because it
basically *is* a file editing function limited to pg_hba.conf. Perhaps
what we need is a file reader/writer that is hardcoded to the
pg_hba.conf file?
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-08-01 14:12:06 | Re: Remote administration functionality |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-08-01 14:03:59 | Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends |