On 04-01-2017 17:30, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> My next thought is ALTER SYSTEM support for pg_hba.conf, especially >> since that would make it easier to do a formal test of Haribabu's >> pg_hba view patch by adding each of the options one by one and then >> juggling them. > > It's quite unclear from this spec what you have in mind to control the > entry order. Also, I'd personally be -1 on inventing a pile of new SQL > keywords for this. Why not do it with a function, instead? Or for extra > credit, finish the pg_hba view work first and then make it an updatable > view. > Even if you made the view updatable, you need a field to control the order. It has the line_number but an specific field would be desirable (someone could add a blank or comment line between querying the view and typing the update command).
Also, in-place update a .conf file was something vetoed in the ALTER SYSTEM design and I think it was a clever idea. If we decided to mix automated and hand editing, a rewrite on every change is an easier path. Unlike ALTER SYSTEM, I'm afraid we can't invent a pg_hba.auto.conf because (i) order matters and (ii) it stops processing when a rule matches. In this case, we'll limit the feature usefulness. If we don't invent new fields in pg_hba.conf, a function could be a solution instead of a SQL syntax. However, a new field could break compatibility (unless we stick with a default value that could not be a good idea in the security pov). -- Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/ PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
