From: | Satoshi Nagayasu <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] read-only database |
Date: | 2005-05-10 03:18:10 |
Message-ID: | 428027F2.1070107@nttdata.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>It's come up a few times ... more than an un-overridable read-only mode
>>anyway. Also, I should think that those who want a secure read-only
>>mode want it enforced selectively --- for instance, assuredly read-only
>>for some users but not others. I can hardly see any use case for the
>>patch as proposed; it seems to have all the disadvantages of a low-level
>>read-only mode (eg, not selective) without any of the advantages.
Our company has some PostgreSQL replication systems
for our customers. I need to switch the database state between
read-only and writable for recovering or maintenance.
As I mentioned before, I wanted to the read-only database mode.
It is the per-database state.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-03/msg00540.php
However, if it is not provided, we have to find alternative way
to get our purpose.
So I'm still looking for how to make the (user) database as read-only.
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp>
OpenSource Development Center,
NTT DATA Corp. http://www.nttdata.co.jp/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-10 03:20:15 | Re: Inline PL/pgSQL |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-10 03:03:51 | Re: [HACKERS] read-only database |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2005-05-10 03:21:26 | Re: [HACKERS] read-only database |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-10 03:03:51 | Re: [HACKERS] read-only database |