Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > OK, I think we are doing this backwards. Instead of adding '@' to > > global users, and then removing it in the backend, why don't we have > > local users end with '@', that way, global users continue to connect > > just as they have before, and local users connect with @, so dave@db1 > > connects as 'dave@' and if he has other database access, he can use the > > same 'dave@' name. > > No, *that* would be backwards. In installations that are using this > feature, the vast majority of the users are going to be local ones. > And the global users will be the presumably-more-sophisticated admins. > Putting the onus of the '@' decoration on the local users instead of > the global ones is exactly the wrong way to go.
OK, but it looks slightly less ugly. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
