> The point of the proposal that I am making is to have a simple,
> low-maintenance solution for people who need a single-application
> database.  A compromise somewhere in the middle isn't likely to be an
> improvement for anybody.  For instance, if you want to have additional
> connections, you open up a whole collection of communication and
> authentication issues, which potential users of a single-application
> database don't want to cope with.

Yes, exactly.

In fact, most of the folks who would want an embedded PostgreSQL either
want no authentication at all, or only a single password.  So supporting
authentication options other than trust or md5 is not required, or
desired AFAIK.

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to