-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org on behalf of Andreas Pflug
Sent: Sun 6/19/2005 12:23 AM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: Robert Treat; Magnus Hagander; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb
> This contradicts my intention to have users *not* to write to it, but
> reserve it for system like stuff. You might take everything that's not
> in postgres binary as non-system, but the average user's perception is
> different.
The main intention of my original post was to suggest a way of keeping users out of template1. This still remains the
mainissue imo, and one that a 'default' database would resolve perfectly well.
> Apparently we really need two initdb created databases for all purposes.
Whether or not users should write to the default db is another issue altogether, and one that I'd rather not see
causingthis idea to be rejected or get delayed past freeze. If 'default' is writeable, then so what if users use it? It
won'tstop pgAdmin from working, and it won't stop CREATE DATABASE from working. If we /really/ don't want them looking
atwhat we're writing to the cluster, then we can just as easily agree a standard name for a database with phpPgAdmin
andany other interested projects, and all co-exist in that. The first time any of the products is used, it creates the
databaseif required.
The important thing is that we have a default database for users to connect to from initdb time, and that it isn't
template1.
Now, as you (Andreas) already seem to have written the easy part of the patch, are you going to check the rest of the
docs& sources for references to template1 (and correct where required), or shall I take some time tomorrow? :-)
Regards, Dave.