Re: Password sub-process ...

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Uh, we've *never* supported "two bruce users" ...

> He was being tricky by having different passwords for the same user on
> each database, so one user couldn't get into the other database, even
> though it was the same name.

But the system didn't realize they were two different users. (Try
dropping just one of them.) And what if they happened to choose the
same password? I think this is a fragile kluge not a supported feature.

> The question is whether using those secondary
> passwords is widespread enough that I need to get that into the code
> too. It was pretty confusing for users, so I am hesitant to re-add it,
> but I hate for Marc to lose functionality he had in the past.

I'd like to think of a better answer, not put back that same kluge.
Ideas anyone?

regards, tom lane