On Wednesday 14 August 2002 02:38 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > The nice thing about it is you can have any combination of people with > > installation-wide access (create them as joeblow) and people with > > one-database access (create them as joeblow@joesdatabase). A special > > case for only the postgres user is much less flexible.
> > Also, if you do it this way then the substitution only has to be done in > > one place: you can pass down the correct form to the backend, which'd > > otherwise have to repeat the test to see which username is found. > Yes, certainly a big win. What we _could_ do is to allow connections to > template1 be unsuffixed by the dbname, but that makes everyone > connecting to template1 have problems, and just seemed too weird. > Ideas? Appending '@template1' to unadorned usernames, and giving inherited rights across the installation to users with template1 rights? Then you have the unadorned 'lowen' becomes 'lowen@template1' -- but lowen@pari wouldn't have access to template1, right? Or am I misunderstanding the feature? -- Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio 1 Peter 4:11 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
