Re: Fix for pg_upgrade user flag - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Fix for pg_upgrade user flag
Date
Msg-id 201105071750.p47HomX15230@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Fix for pg_upgrade user flag  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Fix for pg_upgrade user flag  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > One question I have is why we even bother to allow the database username
> > to be specified?  Shouldn't we just hard-code that to 'postgres'?
> 
> Only if you want to render pg_upgrade unusable by a significant fraction
> of people.  "postgres" is not the hard wired name of the bootstrap
> superuser.

I was really wondering if I should be using that hard-coded name, rather
than allowing the user to supply it.  They have to compile in a
different name, and I assume that name is accessible somewhere.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix for pg_upgrade user flag
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] New Canadian nonprofit for trademark, postgresql.org domain, etc.