* Pavel Stehule (pavel.stehule@gmail.com) wrote:
> 2015-02-27 17:59 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>:
> > I don't think we actually care what the "current contents" are from the
> > backend's point of view- after all, when does an individual backend ever
> > use the contents of pg_hba.conf after it's up and running? What would
> > make sense, to me at least, would be:
> >
> > pg_hba_configured() -- spits back whatever the config file has
> > pg_hba_active() -- shows what the postmaster is using currently
>
> I disagree and I dislike this direction. It is looks like over engineering.
>
> * load every time is wrong, because you will see possibly not active data.
That's the point of the two functions- one to give you what a reload
*now* would, and one to see what's currently active.
> * ignore reload is a attack to mental health of our users.
Huh?
> It should to work like "pg_settings". I need to see "what is wrong in this
> moment" in pg_hba.conf, not what was or what will be wrong.
That's what pg_hba_active() would be from above, yes.
> We can load any config files via admin contrib module - so there is not
> necessary repeat same functionality
That's hardly the same- I can't (easily, anyway) join the results of
pg_read() to pg_hba_active() and see what's different or the same.
Thanks,
Stephen
