Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PG vs MySQL

From: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,Mike Nolan <nolan(at)gw(dot)tssi(dot)com>,"Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Alex <alex(at)meerkatsoft(dot)com>, Frank Finner <postgresql(at)finner(dot)de>,<pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG vs MySQL
Date: 2004-03-29 22:02:08
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-general
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Tom Lane wrote:

> "scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> > And while we're at it, maybe we should have a setting somewhere should 
> > someone execute the famous "update pg_shadow set usesuper = false" that 
> > someone did a while back to be able to force an account to be a superuser 
> > account.
> We already have an adequate solution for that one: shut down the
> postmaster and run a standalone backend.  You are always superuser in
> a standalone backend, so you can create a new superuser or just reverse
> the UPDATE command.

Ahhh.  Good point.  Any chance of having the same behaviour for pg_hba as 
a table?  I.e. you accidentally remove all connectability and you could 
restore it to a pg_hba table?  Does that even make sense?  I'm not sure.

In response to

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Stephan SzaboDate: 2004-03-29 22:19:25
Subject: Re: Interval constant syntax, was Re: Interval & check
Previous:From: Jan WieckDate: 2004-03-29 21:42:25
Subject: Re: PG vs MySQL

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group