On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote: > I think what we have here is already a good semantic representation. It > doesn't handle all the corner cases but those corner cases are a) very > unlikely and b) easy to check for. A tool can check for any users starting > with + or named "all" or any databases called "sameuser" or "samerole". If > they exist then the view isn't good enough to reconstruct the raw file. But > they're very unlikely to exist, I've never heard of anyone with such things > and can't imagine why someone would make them.
-1. Like Peter, I think this is a bad plan. Somebody looking at the view should be able to understand with 100% confidence, and without additional parsing, what the semantics of the pg_hba.conf file are. Saying "those cases are unlikely so we're not going to handle them" is really selling ourselves short. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
