Re: Fwd: Keywords in pg_hba.conf should be field-specific

2011/6/22 Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On 22 June 2011 00:47, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>>> Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of mar jun 21 00:59:44 -0400 2011:
>>>> because >>pamservice<< - is known keyword, but 'pamservice' is some
>>>> literal without any mean. You should to use a makro token_is_keyword
>>>> more often.
>>
>>> Yeah, I wondered about this too (same with auth types, i.e. do we accept
>>> quoted "hostssl" and so on or should that by rejected?).  I opted for
>>> leaving it alone, but maybe this needs to be fixed.  (Now that I think
>>> about it, what we should do first is verify whether it works with quotes
>>> in the unpatched code).
>>
>> AFAICS, this is only important in places where the syntax allows either
>> a keyword or an identifier.  If only a keyword is possible, there is no
>> value in rejecting it because it's quoted.  And, when you do the test,
>> I think you'll find that it would be breaking hba files that used to
>> work (though admittedly, it's doubtful that there are any such in the
>> field).
>
> Yes, I agree, and this was my thinking when I came up against this
> while writing the original patch.  It doesn't help to treat "hostssl"
> differently than hostssl, because quoted identifiers are meaningless
> in that context.

ook, now is clean, so this is majority opinion.

Please, can you send a final patch.

Regards

Pavel

>
> Cheers,
> BJ
>