On 11/18/2010 01:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I thought the proposal on the table was to add "peer" (or some other
> name) to refer to the unix-socket auth method, and use that term
> preferentially in the docs, while continuing to accept "ident" as an
> old name for it. Is that really too confusing?
Not to me. And I think that's a good proposal.
cheers
andrew
