Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes:
> Albe Laurenz wrote:
>> 1) One could have a set of GUCs like min_password_length,
>> min_password_nonchars and similar that everybody
>> could configure. This is not extremely flexible though.
>> 2) Another idea would be a GUC that contains a regular
>> expression that a password may *not* match.
>> Perhaps that's too limiting too.
>> 3) I have also considered a GUC that points to a loadable
>> module that performs the password check if set.
> My vote is for #3, if anything.
Yeah. I think there is no chance of anything in this vein getting
accepted into core Postgres, if only because everybody will have a
different idea of what it needs to do. A hook function (no need
for a GUC) would be a reasonable proposal.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
