Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 August 2002 03:19 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I think we need to resolve this discussion from a week ago. The current
> > code is this:
>
> I thought it WAS resolved, to do:
>
> > global usernames are stored just like before, e.g. postgres
> > local users are stored as user@dbname
> > when connecting, global users add '@' to their names
> > when connecting, local users use just their user name, no @dbname
>
> > Tom likes this because it is the fewer global users who have to append
> > the '@'.
>
> At least that was my perception of the uneasy consensus reached.
>
> Basically, this tags the @ as magic saying, during the client connect process,
> 'I'm GLOBAL, treat me differently'. Now that I actually understand how this
> is supposed to work, which your four lines above elucidate nicely, I am in
> more agreement than I was that this is the right answer to this issue.
OK, you have now split the vote because we have two for the change, and
two against. Why do you prefer to tag the globals? Is it Tom's
argument? I think it is kind of strange to tag the globals when it is
the locals who have @ in their username, and when they do:
$ psql -U dave testWelcome to psql 7.3devel, the PostgreSQL interactive terminal.Type: \copyright for distribution
terms \h for help with SQL commands \? for help on internal slash commands \g or terminate with
semicolonto execute query \q to quittest=> select current_user; current_user -------------- dave@test(1 row)
they will see their full username.
I can go either way. I am just saying we need to hear from more people
to make sure we are doing this properly.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
