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 altering pg_hba.conf from SQL, but we don't need it now. 3. Patching, compilation no warnings, no errors 4. Regress tests test rules ... FAILED -- missing info about new view My objections: 1. data type for "database" field should be array of name or array of text. When name contains a comma, then this comma is not escaped currently: {omega,my stupid extremly, name2,my stupid name} expected: {"my stupid name",omega,"my stupid extremly, name2"} Same issue I see in "options" field 2. Reload is not enough for content refresh - logout is necessary I understand, why it is, but it is not very friendly, and can be very stressful. It should to work with last reloaded data. I have not too strong opinion on @1, but @2 should be fixed. Regards Pavel 2015-01-28 7:46 GMT+01:00 Haribabu Kommi <kommi.harib...@gmail.com>: > 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 text? > > Corrected the address type as inet instead of text. updated patch is > attached. > > > 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? > > Regards, > Hari Babu > Fujitsu Australia > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > >