Re: Permissions on CHECKPOINT

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, "'Oliver Elphick'" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Permissions on CHECKPOINT
Date: 2001-01-26 05:08:25
Message-ID: 28767.980485705@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Mikheev, Vadim writes:
>> Yes, there should be permission checking - I'll add it later (in 7.1)
>> if no one else.

> Should be simple enough. Is this okay:

Actually, I think a more interesting question is "should CHECKPOINT
have permission restrictions? If so, what should they be?"

A quite relevant precedent is that Unix systems (at least the ones
I've used) do not restrict who can call sync().

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

  • PQprint at 2001-01-26 05:20:01 from KuroiNeko

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ryan Kirkpatrick 2001-01-26 05:12:20 Minor Sparc/Linux patch (regression test resultmap)....
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-01-26 04:51:09 Re: RPM: Contrib request.