| From: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Remote administration functionality |
| Date: | 2005-08-01 08:17:21 |
| Message-ID: | 42EDDA91.90901@pse-consulting.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>>The problem is, pg_hba.conf might be editted via the OS unlike the text
>>version of pg_shadow which is only editted via the server, which would
>>make appropriate locking nigh-on impossible afaics.
>>
>>Unless you're advocating only allowing pg_hba modifications via the
>>server, in which case it must be started in default configuration before
>>any mods can be made. That doesn't seem like a good idea to me :-(
>
>
> I am thinking we will need load_pg_hba() and write_pg_hba() that will
> load and write the table to pg_hba.conf.
Isn't the pg_hba.conf situation quite the same as postgresql.conf? The
GUCs with pg_settings is the GUC like a table, but with comments that
exceed config_generic.long_desc.
Regards,
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-08-01 13:14:24 | Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends |
| Previous Message | Michael Paesold | 2005-08-01 07:55:11 | Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends |