Re: [HACKERS] List of hostaddrs not supported - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] List of hostaddrs not supported
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob8TVRW4x9F44jnfT2CiVGzo==v2VRvcr-ofAiXkqyOJw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] List of hostaddrs not supported  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] List of hostaddrs not supported  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:36 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
> Right. I think it's a usability fail as it is; it certainly fooled me. We
> could make the error messages and documentation more clear. But even better
> to allow multiple host addresses, so that it works as you'd expect.

Sure, I don't have a problem with that.  I guess part of the point of
beta releases is to correct things that don't turn out to be as smart
as we thought they were, and this seems to be an example of that.

> I understand the slippery-slope argument that you might also want to have
> different usernames etc. for different hosts, but it's confusing that
> specifying a hostaddr changes the way the host-argument is interpreted. In
> the worst case, if we let that stand, someone might actually start to depend
> on that behavior. The other options don't have that issue. And hostaddr is
> much more closely tied to specifying the target to connect to, like host and
> port are.

Yeah, I'm not objecting to your changes, just telling you what my
chain of reasoning was.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] BUG #14682: row level security not work with partitionedtable
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Alter subscription..SET - NOTICE message is comingfor table which is already removed