Re: Password sub-process ...

From: nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway)
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Password sub-process ...
Date: 2002-07-30 15:23:17
Message-ID: 20020730152316.GA13939@klamath.dyndns.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 11:55:55AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> I think that is the problem with everyone's "thinking" ... they are only
> dealing with 'small servers', where it only has a couple of databases ...
> I'm currently running a server with >100 domains on it, each one with *at
> least* one database ... each one of those domains, in reality, *could*
> have a user 'bruce' ...

First off, I think the implementation of this functionality present in 7.2
was a big hack, and I'd rather not see it resurrected.

However, it would be useful to be able to do something like this -- how
about something like the following:

- the auth system contains a list of 'auth domains' -- an identifier
similar to a schema name

- the combination of (domain, username) must be unique -- i.e. a
username is unique within a domain

- each database exists within a single domain; a domain can have 0,
1, or many databases

- by default, the system ships with a single auth domain; when a
user is created, the admin can specify the domain in which the
user exists, otherwise it defaults to the default domain

Anyway, just thinking out loud -- that may or may not make any sense...

Cheers,

Neil

--
Neil Conway <neilconway(at)rogers(dot)com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro 2002-07-30 15:23:53 Re: Question about LWLockAcquire's use of semaphores instead
Previous Message Joe Conway 2002-07-30 15:23:15 Re: Password sub-process ...