Re: [HACKERS] read-only database

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Satoshi Nagayasu <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] read-only database
Date: 2005-05-18 10:07:27
Message-ID: 1116410847.4809.23.camel@fuji.krosing.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On E, 2005-05-09 at 20:21 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > As I mentioned before, I wanted to the read-only database mode.
> > It is the per-database state.
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-03/msg00540.php
> >
> > However, if it is not provided, we have to find alternative way
> > to get our purpose.
> >
> > So I'm still looking for how to make the (user) database as read-only.
> >
>
> Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator could do this. If you set a database to a
> slave and tell it to be a slave for all tables it would be read only.

Would it still not have the same issues as Slony (one can create new
tables) this patch (one can create temp tables) ?

--
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kaare Rasmussen 2005-05-18 10:57:02 Ingres dump files to PostgreSQL
Previous Message Richard Huxton 2005-05-18 09:42:42 Re: Views update ?

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-05-18 13:40:12 Re: Refactoring in lock.c
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2005-05-18 08:54:05 PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each other out from cleaning old tuples