On 05/16/2015 06:00 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
Regarding next version- are you referring to 9.6 and therefore we
should go ahead and bounce this to the next CF, or were you planning to
post a next version of the patch today?
Yes, for 9.6 version.
No new patch emerged that could be reviewed in
* Haribabu Kommi (kommi.harib...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 5/1/15 12:33 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-04-08 19:19:29 +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm not sure what the best way to handle the hand-off from patch
contribution
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Haribabu Kommi (kommi.harib...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
It still looks quite dubious to me.
The more I test this, the more fond I grow of the idea of
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 5/1/15 12:33 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-04-08 19:19:29 +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm not sure what the best way to handle the hand-off from patch
contribution to reviewer/committer. If I start tweaking things then
On 5/1/15 12:33 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-04-08 19:19:29 +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm not sure what the best way to handle the hand-off from patch
contribution to reviewer/committer. If I start tweaking things then
you send in a new version it's actually more work to resolve the
On 2015-04-08 19:19:29 +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm not sure what the best way to handle the hand-off from patch
contribution to reviewer/committer. If I start tweaking things then
you send in a new version it's actually more work to resolve the
conflicts. I think at this point it's easiest if
I'm not sure what the best way to handle the hand-off from patch
contribution to reviewer/committer. If I start tweaking things then
you send in a new version it's actually more work to resolve the
conflicts. I think at this point it's easiest if I just take it from
here.
I'm puzzled about the
2015-04-04 15:29 GMT+02:00 Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi
2015-03-31 14:38 GMT+02:00 Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com:
keyword_databases - The database name can be all, replication,
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
2015-03-31 14:38 GMT+02:00 Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com:
keyword_databases - The database name can be all, replication,
sameuser, samerole and samegroup.
keyword_roles - The role can be all and a
Hi
2015-03-31 14:38 GMT+02:00 Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 4:34 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi
I checked this patch. I like the functionality and behave.
Thanks for the review.
Here I attached updated patch with the following
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 4:34 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
I checked this patch. I like the functionality and behave.
Thanks for the review.
Here I attached updated patch with the following changes.
1. Addition of two new keyword columns
keyword_databases - The
Hi
I checked this patch. I like the functionality and behave.
There is minor issue with outdated regress test
test rules... FAILED
I have no objections.
Regards
Pavel
2015-03-27 9:23 GMT+01:00 Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:33 PM,
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 3/4/15 1:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Haribabu Kommi
kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
+ foreach(line, parsed_hba_lines)
In the above for loop it is better to add check_for_interrupts
Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
I think what we have here is already a good semantic representation. It
doesn't handle all the corner cases but those corner cases are a) very
unlikely and b) easy to check for. A tool can check for any
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
+1 what Robert said. I think the additional keyword columns are a
good solution to the issue.
Huh. Well I disagree but obviously I'm in the minority. I'll put fix it up
accordingly today and post the resulting
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
I think what we have here is already a good semantic representation. It
doesn't handle all the corner cases but those corner cases are a) very
unlikely and b) easy to check for. A tool can check for any users starting
with + or
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
I think what we have here is already a good semantic representation. It
doesn't handle all the corner cases but those corner
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 1:46 PM, David G. Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not just leave the double-quoting requirements intact. An unquoted
any or sameuser (etc) would represent the special keyword while the
quoted version would mean that the name is used literally.
That would
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:46 PM, David G. Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not just leave the double-quoting requirements intact. An unquoted
any or sameuser (etc) would represent the special keyword while the
quoted version would mean that the name is used literally.
For
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:46 PM, David G. Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not just leave the double-quoting requirements intact. An unquoted
any or sameuser (etc) would represent the special keyword while
On 3/5/15 9:42 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
Well if you want to read the file as is you can do so using the file
reading functions which afaik were specifically intended for the
purpose of writing config editing tools.
Sure, but those things are almost never installed by default, and I
don't want to
2015-03-04 22:41 GMT+01:00 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net:
On 3/3/15 7:17 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
I think we're screwed in that regard anyway, because of the special
constructs. You'd need different logic to handle things like +role and
sameuser. We might even end up painted in a corner
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
everyone seems to have quite different uses for it. Greg wants to join
against other catalog tables, Jim wants to reassemble a valid and
accurate pg_hba.conf, Josh wants to write an editing tool. Personally,
I'd like to
On 3/3/15 7:17 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
I think we're screwed in that regard anyway, because of the special
constructs. You'd need different logic to handle things like +role and
sameuser. We might even end up painted in a corner where we can't change
it in the future because it'll break
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
I feel there is no problem of current pg_hba reloads, because the
check_for_interrupts
doesn't reload the conf files. It will be done in the postgresMain
function once the
query finishes. Am I missing something?
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
After sleeping on it, I realised that the code would return '{all}' for
'all' in pg_hba.conf, but '{all}' for 'all'. So it's not exactly
ambiguous, but I don't think it's especially useful for callers.
Hm. Nope, it
On 3/3/15 9:08 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
After sleeping on it, I realised that the code would return '{all}' for
'all' in pg_hba.conf, but '{all}' for 'all'. So it's not exactly
ambiguous, but I don't think it's
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
What about a separate column that's just the text from pg_hba? Or is that
what you're opposed to?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. There's a rawline field we could
put somewhere but it contains the entire line.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Haribabu Kommi
kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
+ foreach(line, parsed_hba_lines)
In the above for loop it is better to add check_for_interrupts to
avoid it looping
if the parsed_hba_lines are more.
Updated patch is attached with the addition of
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
I can make these changes if you want.
Personally I'm just not convinced this is worth it. It makes the
catalogs harder for people to read and use and only benefits people
who have users named all or databases named all,
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi
kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
Out of curiosity, regarding the result materialize code addition, Any
way the caller of hba_settings function
ExecMakeTableFunctionResult also stores the results in tuple_store.
Is there any advantage
doing it in
On 03/03/2015 05:07 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
I can make these changes if you want.
Personally I'm just not convinced this is worth it. It makes the
catalogs harder for people to read and use and only benefits people
who
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi
kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
Out of curiosity, regarding the result materialize code addition, Any
way the caller of hba_settings function
ExecMakeTableFunctionResult also
On 3/3/15 12:57 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
What about a separate column that's just the text from pg_hba? Or is that what
you're opposed to?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. There's a rawline field we could
put
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
On further review I've made a few more changes attached.
I think we should change the column names to users and databases
to be clear they're lists and also to avoid the user SQL reserved
word.
I removed the dependency on
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
Nobody's allocating anything that big. It's a list of 25,000 pointers
to 472-byte structs. That should add up to about 11MB. Instead the
memory context is a total of 954606152 bytes which is still under a
gigabyte and the database
So earlier someone commented that using lists list_nth() seemed odd and a
tuplestore might be better. In fact using lists this way is O(n^2). I've
done some quick tests and it doesn't start being a problem until about
10,000 lines which obviously isn't a terribly common way to use
Greg,
* Greg Stark (st...@mit.edu) wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com
wrote:
Loading pg_hba.conf during SIGHUP in the backends will solve the
problem of displaying the
data which is not yet loaded. This change may produce a warning if it
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com
wrote:
Loading pg_hba.conf during SIGHUP in the backends will solve the
problem of displaying the
data which is not yet loaded. This change may produce a warning if it
fails to load pg_hba.conf in the backends.
This
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
So earlier someone commented that using lists list_nth() seemed odd and a
tuplestore might be better. In fact using lists this way is O(n^2). I've
done some quick tests and it doesn't start being a problem until about
10,000
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
So I didn't get the memo about SFRM_Materialize. Here's a rewrite of this
using that interface which seems to test ok up to 100k. At that point I start
running into memory errors on reading the HBA file so I guess that's an
* Greg Stark (st...@mit.edu) wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
So I didn't get the memo about SFRM_Materialize. Here's a rewrite of this
using that interface which seems to test ok up to 100k. At that point I
start running into memory errors on
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Uh, maybe because it's trying to allocate over 1GB and palloc() doesn't
support that?
Nobody's allocating anything that big. It's a list of 25,000 pointers
to 472-byte structs. That should add up to about 11MB. Instead the
Greg Stark wrote:
Hm. I'm wondering why I'm getting out of memory errors now with just
25k lines in pg_hba.conf. It looks like the HbaLine struct is only
472 bytes so the list should only be occupying about 11MB. In fact
it's occupying about a gigabyte:
Maybe it's leaking heavily while
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Pavel,
* Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote:
2015-02-27 22:26 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Right, we also need a view (or function, or both) which
* Josh Berkus (j...@agliodbs.com) wrote:
On 02/27/2015 04:41 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
we can do copy of pg_hba.conf somewhere when postmaster starts or when it
is reloaded.
Please see my reply to Tom. There's no trivial way to reach into the
postmaster from a backend- but we do get a
2015-02-28 3:12 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net:
* Josh Berkus (j...@agliodbs.com) wrote:
On 02/27/2015 04:41 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
we can do copy of pg_hba.conf somewhere when postmaster starts or
when it
is reloaded.
Please see my reply to Tom. There's no trivial
2015-02-28 1:41 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net:
Pavel,
* Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote:
2015-02-27 22:26 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Right, we also need a view (or function, or both) which provides what
2015-02-28 2:40 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
I understand that there may be objections to that on the basis that it's
work that's (other than for this case) basically useless,
Got it in one.
I'm also not terribly happy about leaving
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
I understand that there may be objections to that on the basis that it's
work that's (other than for this case) basically useless,
Got it in one.
I'm also not terribly happy about leaving security-relevant data sitting
around in backend memory 100% of
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
I understand that there may be objections to that on the basis that it's
work that's (other than for this case) basically useless,
Got it in one.
Meh. It's hardly all that difficult and it's not useless if
On 02/27/2015 04:41 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
we can do copy of pg_hba.conf somewhere when postmaster starts or when it
is reloaded.
Please see my reply to Tom. There's no trivial way to reach into the
postmaster from a backend- but we do get a copy of whatever the
postmaster had when we
All,
* Tomas Vondra (tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
On 28.1.2015 23:01, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 1/28/15 12:46 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
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
2015-02-27 17:59 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net:
All,
* Tomas Vondra (tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
On 28.1.2015 23:01, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 1/28/15 12:46 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
Also, what happens if someone reloads the config in the middle of
running
the
On 27.2.2015 17:59, Stephen Frost wrote:
All,
* Tomas Vondra (tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
The other feature that'd be cool to have is a debugging function
on top of the view, i.e. a function pg_hba_check(host, ip, db,
user, pwd) showing which hba rule matched. But that's certainly
Hi,
On 28.1.2015 23:01, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 1/28/15 12:46 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
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
Hi
It looks well, I have only one objection.
I am not sure so function hba_settings should be in file guc.c - it has
zero relation to GUC.
Maybe hba.c file is better probably.
Other opinions?
2015-02-27 7:30 GMT+01:00 Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 8:26 PM,
On 02/27/2015 10:35 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
From time to time I have to debug why are connection attempts failing,
and with moderately-sized pg_hba.conf files (e.g. on database servers
shared by multiple applications) that may be tricky. Identifying the
rule that matched (and rejected) the
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 27.2.2015 17:59, Stephen Frost wrote:
All,
* Tomas Vondra (tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
The other feature that'd be cool to have is a debugging function
on top of the view, i.e. a function
* Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote:
2015-02-27 17:59 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net:
I don't think we actually care what the current contents are from the
backend's point of view- after all, when does an individual backend ever
use the contents of pg_hba.conf after
* Tomas Vondra (tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
On 27.2.2015 17:59, Stephen Frost wrote:
All,
* Tomas Vondra (tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
The other feature that'd be cool to have is a debugging function
on top of the view, i.e. a function pg_hba_check(host, ip, db,
* Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote:
this topic should be divided, please. One part - functions for loading
pg_hba and translating to some table. Can be two, can be one with one
parameter. It will be used probably by advanced user, and I am able to
accept it like you or Tomas
2015-02-27 19:32 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net:
* Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote:
2015-02-27 17:59 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net:
I don't think we actually care what the current contents are from the
backend's point of view- after all, when does
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Right, we also need a view (or function, or both) which provides what
the *active* configuration of the running postmaster is. This is
exactly what I was proposing (or what I was intending to, at least) with
pg_hba_active, so, again, I think we're in
2015-02-27 22:26 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Right, we also need a view (or function, or both) which provides what
the *active* configuration of the running postmaster is. This is
exactly what I was proposing (or what I was intending to,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Right, we also need a view (or function, or both) which provides what
the *active* configuration of the running postmaster is. This is
exactly what I was proposing (or what I was intending to, at least) with
Pavel,
* Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote:
2015-02-27 22:26 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Right, we also need a view (or function, or both) which provides what
the *active* configuration of the running postmaster is. This is
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
I am sending a review of this patch.
Thanks for the review. sorry for the delay.
4. Regress tests
test rules... FAILED -- missing info about new view
Thanks. Corrected.
My objections:
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
On 01/30/2015 10:01 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. The contents of postgresql.conf are only mildly order-dependent.
If you put the same setting in more than once, it matters which one is
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
I think the big problem you are mentioning can be resolved in
a similar way as we have done for ALTER SYSTEM which is
to have a separate file (.auto.conf) for settings done via
ALTER SYSTEM command, do you see any
On 1/29/15 9:13 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
Aside from Tom's concern about sets not being a good way to handle
this (which I agree with), the idea of editing pg_hba.conf via SQL
raises all the problems that were brought up when ALTER SYSTEM was being
developed. One of the big problems is a question
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think the big problem you are mentioning can be resolved in
a similar way as we have done for ALTER SYSTEM which is
to have a separate
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
=?UTF-8?Q?Fabr=C3=ADzio_de_Royes_Mello?= fabriziome...@gmail.com writes:
But I'm thinking about this patch and would not be interesting to have a
FDW to manipulate the hba file? Imagine if we are able to manipulate the
HBA
On 1/29/15 6:19 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
=?UTF-8?Q?Fabr=C3=ADzio_de_Royes_Mello?= fabriziome...@gmail.com
mailto:fabriziome...@gmail.com writes:
But I'm thinking about this patch and
On 1/28/15 12:46 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
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?
Ahh, good
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:46 AM, Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com
wrote:
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
=?UTF-8?Q?Fabr=C3=ADzio_de_Royes_Mello?= fabriziome...@gmail.com writes:
But I'm thinking about this patch and would not be interesting to have a
FDW to manipulate the hba file? Imagine if we are able to manipulate the
HBA file using INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE.
Since the HBA file is fundamentally
On 1/27/15 1:04 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think having two columns would work. The columns could be called
database and database_list and user and user_list respectively.
The database column may contain one of
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
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think having two columns would work. The columns could be called
database and database_list and user and user_list respectively.
The database column may contain one of all, sameuser, samegroup,
replication, but
At 2014-06-29 22:25:54 +0530, a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think the really right thing to do would be to have two separate
columns, one with all, sameuser, samerole, replication, or
empty; and the other an array of database names.
After sleeping on it, I realised that the code would return
Hi Vaishnavi.
In addition to Jaime's comments about the functionality, here are are
some comments about the code.
Well, they were supposed to be comments about the code, but it turns out
I have comments about the feature as well. We need to figure out what to
do about the database and user
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Prabakaran, Vaishnavi
vaishna...@fast.au.fujitsu.com wrote:
Hi,
In connection to my previous proposal about providing catalog view to
pg_hba.conf file contents , I have developed the attached patch .
[...]
[What this Patch does]
Functionality of the
On Friday, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Maganus Hagander
mag...@hagander.netmailto:mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Hi,
In connection to my previous proposal about providing catalog view to
pg_hba.conf file contents , I have developed the attached patch .
[Current situation]
Currently, to view the
From: Magnus Hagander [mailto:mag...@hagander.net]
Sent: Friday, 14 March 2014 9:33 PM
To: Prabakaran, Vaishnavi
Cc: PostgreSQL-development
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Providing catalog view to pg_hba.conf file - Patch
submission
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:30 AM, Prabakaran, Vaishnavi
vaishna
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:30 AM, Prabakaran, Vaishnavi
vaishna...@fast.au.fujitsu.com wrote:
Hi,
In connection to my previous proposal about providing catalog view to
pg_hba.conf file contents , I have developed the attached patch .
[Current situation]
Currently, to view the
Hi,
In connection to my previous proposal about providing catalog view to
pg_hba.conf file contents , I have developed the attached patch .
[Current situation]
Currently, to view the pg_hba.conf file contents, DB admin has to access
the file from database server to read the settings. In
88 matches
Mail list logo
