Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 2:02 PM Vik Fearing <vik.fear...@2ndquadrant.com>
> wrote:
>> I'm all for this (and even suggested it during the IRC conversation that
>> prompted this patch). It's rife with bikeshedding, though. My original
>> proposal was to use '&' and Andrew Gierth would have used ':'.
> I think this is a good proposal regardless of which character we
> decide to use. My order of preference from highest-to-lowest would
> probably be :*&, but maybe that's just because I'm reading this on
> Sunday rather than on Tuesday.
I don't have any particular objection to '&' if people prefer that.
But ':' seems like it would introduce confusion with the
variable-substitution notation used in psql and some other places.
It's not that hard to imagine that somebody might want a
variable-substitution notation in pg_hba.conf someday, so we should
leave syntax room for one, and ':' seems like a likely choice
for it (although I suppose a case could be made for '$' too).
regards, tom lane
