| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: security labels on databases are bad for dump & restore |
| Date: | 2015-07-15 09:08:53 |
| Message-ID: | 20150715090853.GH5520@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-07-15 12:04:40 +0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andres Freund wrote:
> > One thing worth mentioning is that arguably the problem is caused by the
> > fact that we're here emitting database level information in pg_dump,
> > normally only done for dumpall.
>
> ... the reason for which is probably the lack of CURRENT_DATABASE as a
> database specifier. It might make sense to add the rest of
> database-level information to pg_dump output, when we get that.
I'm not sure. I mean, it's not that an odd idea to assign a label to a
database and then restore data into it, and expect the explicitly
assigned label to survive. Not sure if there actually is a good
behaviour either way here :/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2015-07-15 10:39:04 | Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2 |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-07-15 09:04:40 | Re: security labels on databases are bad for dump & restore |