On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 11:58 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Rajesh Kumar Mallah >> <mallah.rajesh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Dear List , >> > >> > It is been found that the entry >> > >> > local all all trust >> > >> > does not renders below redundant in pg_hba.conf >> > >> > local replication replicator01 trust >> >> I noticed this too, and I think it should. Either way, the >> documentation isn't clear on this point -- either 'all' should include >> the faux replication database or it should be noted in appropriate >> places that 'all' doesn't/can't do that. >> > > "all" includes all real databases, not "virtual" one. The documentation > could probably be clearer, but "all" shouldn't include the virtual > "replication" database. ok, what's your rationale for that? pg_hba.conf is a rule based system with no distinction given for rule vs virtual databases. what if we create more virtual databases? do you always have explicitly create a rule for each database for each user? IMSNHO, the more I think about it, the more I think current behavior is broken. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
