| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection |
| Date: | 2010-04-15 00:37:18 |
| Message-ID: | y2u603c8f071004141737kf8b19c07pc5d745f83149b3df@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > What's wrong with something like "connection not permitted" or
>> > "connection not authorized"?
>>
>> The case that we're trying to cater to with the existing wording is
>> novice DBAs, who are likely to stare at such a message and not even
>> realize that pg_hba.conf is what they need to change. Frankly, by
>> the time anyone is using REJECT entries they are probably advanced
>> enough to not need much help from the error message; but what you
>> propose is an absolute lock to increase the number of newbie questions
>> on the lists by a large factor.
>
> Agreed. I would rather have an inaccurate error message that mentions
> pg_hba.conf than an accurate one that doesn't.
>
> Error messages should always point at a solution, if possible.
OK, how about "connection not authorized by pg_hba.conf"?
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-15 00:48:17 | Re: extended operator classes vs. type interfaces |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-15 00:31:17 | Re: Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection |