Re: [GENERAL] users in Postgresql
От | postgres@taifun.interface-business.de |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] users in Postgresql |
Дата | |
Msg-id | XFMail.991104090929.postgres@taifun.interface-business.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] users in Postgresql (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] users in Postgresql
|
Список | pgsql-general |
>> The contents of the pg_shadow table are written through to a file on disk >> called pg_pwd, so all the backends can easily access it. However, this >> write through is not automatic. The create user and alter user commands >> take care of that, but if you update pg_shadow directly, your changes will >> not be seen by currently active backends. > > Your changes never get to the file, ever, not just current backends. > > CREATE USER sql command updates the file, but an UPDATE on pg_shadow > does not. IMHO, that's a bug: It's not forbidden to update or insert into pg_shadow by rule, but if I do that I will get inconsistent authentication data. Why not revoke INSERT and UPDATE on pg_shadow? Or better: Why not use a trigger on pg_shadow, to handle pg_pwd correctly? The trigger code is allways in "create/alter user" command handler. The code should be as near as possible on data! > We use a file because the postmaster does the password authentication, > and we don't have any database connection the postmaster. pg_shadow is a file too, but not in text format like pg_pwd. Gerald.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: