Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> So you'd prefer a message that is sometimes flat-out wrong over a
>> message that is correct but less informative in the common case? I
>> guess that could be right call, but it's not what I'd pick.
>
> Well, as I said, I think the only way to really improve this message
> is to use a different wording for the REJECT case. I'm unconvinced
> that the problem justifies that, but if you're sufficiently hot about
> it, that is the direction to go in; not making the the message less
> useful for the 99% case.
How about a hint?
FATAL: connection not authorized for host "[local]", user "foo",
database "postgres"
HINT: Make sure that you have a matching accept line in pg_hba.conf
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
