Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-28 Thread Daniel Farina
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Use a service file maybe? But you can't have it both ways: either we like the behavior of libpq absorbing defaults from the postmaster environment, or

Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Albe Laurenz laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at wrote: I agree that this is an unhappy situation. If possible, I would suggest the following defaults (that's what I as a user would expect without thinking too hard): 1) Default the user to the current effective database

Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-27 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Albe Laurenz laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at wrote: If possible, I would suggest the following defaults (that's what I as a user would expect without thinking too hard): 1) Default the user to the current effective database

Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Albe Laurenz laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at wrote: If possible, I would suggest the following defaults (that's what I as a user would expect without

Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-27 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: It's arguable that we should unsetenv all of these inside the postmaster (once it's absorbed the values from the ones it historically pays attention to), so that the postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: It's arguable that we should unsetenv all of these inside the postmaster (once it's absorbed the values from the

Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-25 Thread Albe Laurenz
Tom Lane wrote: It struck me while looking at the regression test arrangements for postgres_fdw that as things are set up, the default username for outgoing connections is going to be that of the operating system user running the postmaster. dblink is the same way. Now, this might not be

[HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-22 Thread Tom Lane
It struck me while looking at the regression test arrangements for postgres_fdw that as things are set up, the default username for outgoing connections is going to be that of the operating system user running the postmaster. dblink is the same way. Now, this might not be the world's worst

Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-22 Thread Jeff Davis
On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 12:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Is there a better way to handle all this? It may be too late to rethink dblink's behavior anyhow, but perhaps it's not too late to change postgres_fdw. I think though that once we let 9.3 out the door, it *will* be too late to make any major

Re: [HACKERS] Default connection parameters for postgres_fdw and dblink

2013-03-22 Thread Tom Lane
Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com writes: On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 12:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Is there a better way to handle all this? It may be too late to rethink dblink's behavior anyhow, but perhaps it's not too late to change postgres_fdw. I think though that once we let 9.3 out the door, it