From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Leung, Anthony" <antholeu(at)amazon(dot)com>, "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Allow non-superuser to cancel superuser tasks. |
Date: | 2024-04-10 15:00:34 |
Message-ID: | 20240410150034.GA1673069@nathanxps13 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 07:58:39AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 12:52:19AM +0300, Kirill Reshke wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 at 08:53, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>>> The thing is that you cannot rely on a lookup of the backend type for
>>> the error information, or you open yourself to letting the caller of
>>> pg_cancel_backend or pg_terminate_backend know if a backend is
>>> controlled by a superuser or if a backend is an autovacuum worker.
>>
>> Good catch. Thanks. I think we need to update the error message to not
>> leak backend type info.
>
> Yep, that's necessary I am afraid.
Isn't it relatively easy to discover this same information today via
pg_stat_progress_vacuum? That has the following code:
/* Value available to all callers */
values[0] = Int32GetDatum(beentry->st_procpid);
values[1] = ObjectIdGetDatum(beentry->st_databaseid);
I guess I'm not quite following why we are worried about leaking whether a
backend is an autovacuum worker.
>>> The choice of pg_signal_autovacuum is a bit inconsistent, as well,
>>> because autovacuum workers operate like regular backends. This name
>>> can also be confused with the autovacuum launcher.
>>
>> Ok. What would be a good choice? Is `pg_signal_autovacuum_worker` good
>> enough?
>
> Sounds fine to me. Perhaps others have an opinion about that?
WFM
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | jian he | 2024-04-10 15:03:30 | Re: Can't find not null constraint, but \d+ shows that |
Previous Message | Parag Paul | 2024-04-10 14:55:41 | Re: Issue with the PRNG used by Postgres |