On Wednesday 14 August 2002 02:38 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > The nice thing about it is you can have any combination of people with
> > installation-wide access (create them as joeblow) and people with
> > one-database access (create them as joeblow@joesdatabase). A special
> > case for only the postgres user is much less flexible.
> > Also, if you do it this way then the substitution only has to be done in
> > one place: you can pass down the correct form to the backend, which'd
> > otherwise have to repeat the test to see which username is found.
> Yes, certainly a big win. What we _could_ do is to allow connections to
> template1 be unsuffixed by the dbname, but that makes everyone
> connecting to template1 have problems, and just seemed too weird.
> Ideas?
Appending '@template1' to unadorned usernames, and giving inherited rights
across the installation to users with template1 rights? Then you have the
unadorned 'lowen' becomes 'lowen@template1' -- but lowen@pari wouldn't have
access to template1, right? Or am I misunderstanding the feature?
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
