* Dave Page (dpage@vale-housing.co.uk) wrote:
> > Alright, sorry to just jump in here in the middle, but I don't see why
> > pg_hba.conf couldn't be made to work just like pg_shadow (or rather,
> > pg_authid or whatever it is now :).
>
> Because the admin doesn't edit pg_shadow using vi or some other editor,
> and then possibly forget to tell the postmaster to reload it before
> someone else writes a new copy via the server.
This isn't actually an argument against my proposal. The admin doesn't
edit pg_shadow using vi because it's understood to be 'owned' by the
database. The same would be true of 'pg_hba' in my solution.
Thanks,
Stephen
