| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER DATABASE and datallowconn |
| Date: | 2012-05-03 14:28:26 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEzwdKFOqYrhvZNsWo5TjbAxYDpoUUcN95_eMeUVfB3jfw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>>>> Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
>>>> that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something "missed out"?
>
>>> It was never intended to be a user-accessible switch, just something to
>>> protect template0.
>
>> It can be rather useful for others as well, though - since it works as
>> a defense against superusers doing the wrong thing..
>
> I'm having a hard time seeing the use-case for a user-created database
> that nobody at all can connect to. Even if there is some marginal use
template databases.
> for that, you could achieve the result with a special entry in
> pg_hba.conf to "reject" all connection attempts for that DB.
Yeah, that would work.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-05-03 14:33:12 | Re: How hard would it be to support LIKE in return declaration of generic record function calls ? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-05-03 14:26:34 | Re: ALTER DATABASE and datallowconn |