| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf |
| Date: | 2011-09-16 12:13:07 |
| Message-ID: | 1316175187.14316.1.camel@fsopti579.F-Secure.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On fre, 2011-09-16 at 01:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> As far as the other issues go, I think there is actually a
> prerequisite
> discussion to be had here, which is whether we are turning the
> recovery
> parameters into plain old GUCs or not. If they are plain old GUCs,
> then
> they will presumably still have their values when we are *not* doing
> recovery. That leads to a couple of questions:
> * will seeing these values present in pg_settings confuse anybody?
How so? We add or change the available parameters all the time.
> * can the values be changed when not in recovery, if so what happens,
> and again will that confuse anybody?
Should be similar to archive_command and archive_mode. You can still
see and change archive_command when archive_mode is off.
> * is there any security hazard from ordinary users being able to see
> what settings had been used?
Again, not much different from the archive_* settings. They are, after
all, almost the same in the opposite direction.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2011-09-16 12:25:44 | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-09-16 11:07:43 | Re: Double sorting split patch |