Hi
I am sending a review of this patch.
1. We would this patch?
yes. It is a good idea - checking internal view is more comfortable and
faster than checking some (possibly longer) pg_hba.conf. There was no
objections.
2. Scope - does this patch, what we need?
yes. There was a discussion about altering pg_hba.conf from SQL, but we
don't need it now.
3. Patching, compilation
no warnings, no errors
4. Regress tests
test rules ... FAILED -- missing info about new view
My objections:
1. data type for "database" field should be array of name or array of text.
When name contains a comma, then this comma is not escaped
currently: {omega,my stupid extremly, name2,my stupid name}
expected: {"my stupid name",omega,"my stupid extremly, name2"}
Same issue I see in "options" field
2. Reload is not enough for content refresh - logout is necessary
I understand, why it is, but it is not very friendly, and can be very
stressful. It should to work with last reloaded data.
I have not too strong opinion on @1, but @2 should be fixed.
Regards
Pavel
2015-01-28 7:46 GMT+01:00 Haribabu Kommi <kommi.harib...@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com>
> wrote:
> > On 1/27/15 1:04 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> >>
> >> Here I attached the latest version of the patch.
> >> I will add this patch to the next commitfest.
> >
> >
> > Apologies if this was covered, but why isn't the IP address an inet
> instead
> > of text?
>
> Corrected the address type as inet instead of text. updated patch is
> attached.
>
> > Also, what happens if someone reloads the config in the middle of running
> > the SRF?
>
> hba entries are reloaded only in postmaster process, not in every backend.
> So there shouldn't be any problem with config file reload. Am i
> missing something?
>
> Regards,
> Hari Babu
> Fujitsu Australia
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
>
