On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 12:01 AM David G. Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 1, 2025 at 8:31 PM Jianghua Yang <yjhj...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> git show 8e673801262c66af4a54837f63ff596407835c20 >> >> >> effective_user = get_id(); >> >> - if (strlen(username) == 0) >> >> + if (!username) >> >> username = effective_user; >> >> >> The previous code already intended to treat a missing username as falling >> back to the system user. >> The check was changed from strlen(username) == 0 to !username, but this >> inadvertently stopped handling the empty-string case. This patch restores >> the original intent and makes the behavior consistent. >>> >>> > > At this point I'd rather take advantage of this behaveing in the "doesn't > work" category for the past 8 years, and thus all supported releases, and not > change existing behavior (just improve the error message) rather than accept > original intent. Also, the amount of things it has to be consistent with is > quite small and I'm pytr sure that some of those are also broken - > encoding/pgdata/textsearch all exhibit the same pattern (xlog is the reverse > so maybe ok...) >
FWIW, I tend to agree with David; I feel like if a user passes in -U, there was probably a reason, and a good error message would be more useful in clarifying things rather than blindly pushing forward with potentially the wrong thing. Robert Treat https://xzilla.net
