Re: Password sub-process ...

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > First and foremost in my mind ... how do you have two users in the system
> > with seperate passwords? ...
> > since as soon as there are two 'bruce' users, only one can have a password
>
> Uh, we've *never* supported "two bruce users" ... users have always been
> installation-wide. I am not sure what the notion of a database-owning
> user means if user names are not of wider scope than databases.
>
> No doubt we could redesign the system so that user names are local to a
> database, and break a lot of existing setups in the process. But what's
> the value? If you want separate usernames you can set up separate
> postmasters. If we change, and you don't want separate user names
> across databases, you'll be out of luck.

On the topic of whether Marc gets extra consideration for feature
requests, here is a funny joke about Jerry Pournelle from Byte Magazine:

http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/95q1/jpreviews.html

I love the helicopter tech support.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026