| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jan de Visser <jan(at)de-visser(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing binaries |
| Date: | 2017-03-21 14:46:38 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZAUhh4wiCEUJiBxn2+2CF_DT3s_OhHCbZACttWcPBo7Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:43 AM, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> wrote:
> I suppose it would be too big a change to have psql try the username and
> then fallback to postgres on failure?
It's not so much that the change would be too big as that the
resulting semantics would be confusing, at least IMHO. Imagine:
1. Person A logs into the service account, runs psql, starts creating
stuff in postgres DB without realizing it.
2. Person B logs into the service account, runs psql -l, sees that the
usual DB name is not there, runs createdb.
3. Person A reruns psql and says "where'd all my stuff go?".
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-21 14:56:13 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add missing support for new node fields |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2017-03-21 14:43:53 | Re: Removing binaries |