Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Thanks for the input. I decided to push what we had because it's less
> invasive in terms of API definition.
I dunno, this might be easier for the callers that don't want password
re-use, but it seems quite horrid for ones that do. The changes to
vacuumdb.c are, frankly, seriously ugly; and they require vacuumdb.c
to know a lot more than before about password handling.
Other notes are that the strdup() call should surely be pg_strdup(),
and the mix of free() and pg_free() is at best unsightly.
On the whole I don't think this was ready to push.
The place I was thinking we might end up was something like Fujii-san's
patch plus a new bool parameter "allow_password_reuse", which could be
passed as false in cases where the old behavior seems preferable.
regards, tom lane
