Re: Open 7.3 items
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Open 7.3 items |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 25338.1029432086@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Open 7.3 items (Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Open 7.3 items
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com> writes: > But it doesn't need to affect anyone, even if it's enabled. Isn't > the lack of an @ just as good as an @ at the end of the username? No, because there isn't any @ in the incoming connection request in the normal-user case: just a user name and a database name, which *we* have to assemble into user@database. We can't really expect the users to do this for us (give user@database as their full user name). There are a number of reasons why I don't wanna do that, but the real showstopper is that the username field of the connection request packet is only 32 bytes wide, and we cannot enlarge it without a protocol breakage. Fitting "user@database" in 32 bytes would be awfully restrictive about your user and database names. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: