huxm wrote > where there is a > newline(\n) in the name. I can't imagine why you would want to use non-printing characters in a name, especially a database name. Even if the hba.conf file was able to interpret it (which it probably cannot but I do not know for certain) client interfaces are likely to have problems as well. Most of these would not think of interpolating a database identifier in that manner but instead treat the name as a literal value. Even when line-continuations are allowed they are often cosmetic in nature and the resultant newline is discarded during the pre-execution phase of the command interpreter.
Arguably having a check constraint on the catalog to prohibit such a name would be more useful than trying to make such a construct functional. I'd guess in the immediate term the users accessing this database would need to have "all" as their target and then you use role-based authorization to limit which specific databases are accessible. David J. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/How-to-configer-the-pg-hba-record-which-the-database-name-with-n-tp5765847p5765889.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
