Re: pg_upgrade and PGPORT

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and PGPORT
Date: 2011-05-11 18:18:38
Message-ID: 3158.1305137918@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> A larger question is whether we should just disable all the checks for
> environment variables. The C comment says:

> * check_for_libpq_envvars()
> *
> * tests whether any libpq environment variables are set.
> * Since pg_upgrade connects to both the old and the new server,
> * it is potentially dangerous to have any of these set.
> *
> * If any are found, will log them and cancel.

> I am not sure what to do.

Well, the risk mentioned in that comment certainly seems real.

An alternative solution that might be more user-friendly is to ensure
that the connection strings pg_upgrade uses specify all important
options, leaving nothing to be overridden by environment variables.
Then you don't need to make the user adjust his environment.

Or you could just "unsetenv" instead of complaining.

I would like to think that eventually pg_upgrade won't start a
postmaster at all, but connect using something more like a standalone
backend. So someday the issue might go away --- but that someday
isn't especially close.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2011-05-11 18:26:29 Re: pg_upgrade and PGPORT
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-05-11 18:04:34 Re: potential bug in trigger with boolean params