Greetings,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 2020-05-20 17:33, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >>But this leads to other questions, like, what should pg_upgrade do?
> >Same as it always has- make the user deal with anything they need to
> >regarding postgresql.conf? Why would anything change with pg_upgrade?
>
> Well, one might expect that the user at least gets some kind of notification
> that something is changing. What happens when you end up with a mix of MD5
> and SCRAM passwords in pg_authid? Are users going to be notified about this
> somehow? Has this been thought through to the end? Have all combinations
> been tested?
I agree that these things should have been thought through and
considered and that the original patch should have addressed every
possible angle. That didn't happen though. There's things that could
be dealt with in the packaging to improve things for users of
pg_upgradecluster, but that's not on the RPM side anyway.
wrt the specific questions- if you have 'md5' in your pg_hba.conf then a
mix of md5 and SCRAM passwords will allow users to still log in- md5
will "upgrade" to SCRAM. If you have scram in pg_hba.conf then you have
to be using SCRAM to connect (which wasn't a great decision, but that's
what was implemented). Of course, that's not a problem for *new*
installs, and that's really what we're talking about here. We aren't
going to be changing any existing configurations with this, just the
*defaults* for new installs, which users who are using pg_upgrade are
going to have to change in just about all cases anyway, particularly on
RHEL.
Thanks,
Stephen
