Hello Brendan, I checked your patch, it is applied cleanly and I don't see any mayor problem. This patch does all what is expected.
I have two minor comments a) you don't use macro "token_matches" consistently func: parse_hba_line <------>if (strcmp(token->string, "local") == 0) should be if (token_is_keyword(token, "local")) ... I don't see any sense when somebody use a quotes there. b) probably you can simplify a memory management using own two persistent memory context - and you can swap it. Then functions like free_hba_record, clean_hba_list, free_lines should be removed. Regards Pavel Stehule 2011/6/18 Brendan Jurd <dire...@gmail.com>: > On 18 June 2011 13:43, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> Is this really a WIP patch? I'm playing a bit with it currently, seems >> fairly sane. >> > > In this case, the WIP designation is meant to convey "warning: only > casual testing has beeen done". I tried it out with various > permutations of pg_hba.conf, and it worked as advertised in those > tests, but I have not made any attempt to formulate a more rigorous > testing regimen. > > In particular I haven't tested that the more exotic authentication > methods still work properly, and I can't recall whether I tested > recursive file inclusion and group membership. > > Is that a wrongful use of the WIP designation? > > Cheers, > BJ > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
