| From: | Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Selena Deckelmann <selena(at)endpoint(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Make SIGHUP less painful if pg_hba.conf is not readable |
| Date: | 2009-03-05 21:43:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20090305214342.GR25872@eddie |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 08:19:05PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On Thursday 05 March 2009 18:04:42 Joshua Tolley wrote:
> >> As an aside, is access() adequately portable, ok to use within the
> >> backend, etc.? I just sort of took a shot in the dark.
> >
> > Using access() is usually not a good idea. In this case it would be better to
> > check the return of the actual open() call for EPERM (or the equivalent for
> > fopen(), whatever is used).
>
> That's what we do in the proper fix in HEAD. It requires an API change
> to backport it...
>
> Given that I think this is the first time we've heard of this issue, I'm
> thinking we should probably just not bother to backpatch it.
I'm inclined to agree, FWIW.
- Josh / eggyknap
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bernd Helmle | 2009-03-05 23:32:40 | Re: Validating problem in the isn contrib module |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2009-03-05 20:37:22 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #4689: Expanding the length of a VARCHAR column should not induce a table rewrite |