It had such limited usefulness ('password' only, only crypted-hashed
passwords in the file) that it doesn't make much sense to resurect it.
To directly address your point, I don't think this new feature will be
used enough to add the capability to the user admin commands.
I know you object, so I am going to ask for a vote.
OK, here is the request for vote. Do we want:
1) the old secondary passwords re-added2) the new prefixing of the database name to the username when enabled3) do
nothing
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > OK, if you object, you can say goodbye to this feature for 7.3. I can
> > supply the patch to Marc and anyone else who wants it but I am not
> > inclined nor convinced we need that level of work for this feature.
>
> The right solution, IMO, is to resurrect the feature we had and think
> about a fully-featured solution for the next release. Or try to sell the
> proposed solutions as fully-featured . . .
>
> --
> Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
