> On 19 Mar 2026, at 10:39, Michael Banck <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm really late to the part, but I did not see it discussed elsewhere on > a quick glance: Isn't pg_hosts.conf a really (too) generic name for this > feature? I don't want to open a huge bikeshedding sub-thread, but was a > more specific filename considered?
I don't recall any discussion on that, and I don't really see a problem off the cuff. As it is a config file for defining hostnames and their config, in which way do you feel its too generic and what would "claiming that name" for this prevent (or how would it confuse)? Do you have any alternative suggestions? -- Daniel Gustafsson
