On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>>>> Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
>>>> that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something "missed out"?
>>> It was never intended to be a user-accessible switch, just something to
>>> protect template0.
>> It can be rather useful for others as well, though - since it works as
>> a defense against superusers doing the wrong thing..
> I'm having a hard time seeing the use-case for a user-created database
> that nobody at all can connect to. Even if there is some marginal use
> for that, you could achieve the result with a special entry in
> pg_hba.conf to "reject" all connection attempts for that DB.
Yeah, that would work.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-05-03 14:33:12|
|Subject: Re: How hard would it be to support LIKE in return declaration of generic record function calls ? |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-05-03 14:26:34|
|Subject: Re: ALTER DATABASE and datallowconn |