Re: TODO list
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: TODO list |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13986.1071701139@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: TODO list (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: TODO list
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > case 6 - limit all users' connections regardless of database: > limit all all n That's called max_connections. Don't think we need a redundant implementation of same ... Another little nitpick is that I don't like assuming that "any" and "all" are never going to be used as database or user names. (I know that pg_hba.conf already uses "all" this way, and IMHO that was a bogus decision. Something like "*" would have been less likely to collide.) On an implementation level, where are you thinking of enforcing this? pg_hba.conf would not be very appropriate for the most likely place to put it, which is in backend startup shortly after establishing a PGPROC entry (with the data about numbers of active connections obtained by scanning the PGPROC array for other backends connected to the same database or with the same userid). I think we've thrown away the PostmasterContext long before that, so we couldn't use cached pg_hba.conf data without some redesign of the startup sequence. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: