> The confusion that 0001 is addressing is fair (cough, fc579e1, cough),
> still I am wondering whether we could do a bit better to be more
Yeah, even after 0001 it's definitely suboptimal. I tried to keep the changes
minimal to not distract from the main purpose of this patch. But I'll update
the patch to have some more. I'll respond to your other question first
> In what is your proposal different from the following
> entry in pg_ident.conf? As of:
> mapname /^(.*)$ \1
It's very different. I think easiest is to explain by example:
If there exist three users on the postgres server: admin, jelte and michael
Then this rule (your suggested rule):
mapname /^(.*)$ \1
Is equivalent to:
mapname admin admin
mapname jelte jelte
mapname michael michael
While with the "all" keyword you can create a rule like this:
mapname admin all
which is equivalent to:
mapname admin admin
mapname admin jelte
mapname admin michael