| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes |
| Date: | 2021-05-06 19:31:02 |
| Message-ID: | 4175732.1620329462@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2021-05-06 14:56:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If we think it's worth having a predefined role for, OK. However,
>> I don't like the future I see us heading towards where there are
>> hundreds of random predefined roles. Is there an existing role
>> that it'd be reasonable to attach this ability to?
> It does seem like it'd be good to group it in with something
> else. There's nothing fitting 100% though.
I'd probably vote for pg_read_all_data, considering that much of
the concern about this has to do with the possibility of exposure
of sensitive data. I'm not quite sure what the security expectations
are for pg_monitor.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2021-05-06 19:32:29 | Re: [BUG]"FailedAssertion" reported in lazy_scan_heap() when running logical replication |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-05-06 19:27:29 | Re: use `proc->pgxactoff` as the value of `index` in `ProcArrayRemove()` |