* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > > Good point. What about the other suggestion about only displaying > > databases by default that you can connect to? > > I would tend not to adopt that suggestion, on the grounds that it has > no obvious parallel with anything else psql hides by default. > However, I don't feel quite as strongly about that case.
In the past, haven't we done this through the catalog tables themselves
rather than hacking up psql..? pg_stats being a prime example? With
the row-level-security discussion, there was talk about if we might be
able to apply that capability to catalogs also. That strikes me as a
better option/approach than doing any of this in one particular
application (psql in this case) which connects to PG.
tbh, I'm not entirely against excluding databases that don't allow *any*
connections (key'd off datallowconns) to clear out template0/template1
from the default list, but I see that as different from "things I don't
have permissions to".
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
