From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: contrib: auth_delay module |
Date: | 2010-11-17 17:17:02 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinNxZLDeDs85XBAeJZtL8br0FbrjwhB-PE8Yrx1@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:41:37PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 8:15 PM, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> wrote:
>> > If we don't need a PoC module for each new hooks, I'm not strongly
>> > motivated to push it into contrib tree.
>> > How about your opinion?
>>
>> I'd say let it go, unless someone else feels strongly about it.
>
> I would use this module (rate limit new connection attempts) as soon as
> I could. Putting a cap on potential CPU usage on a production DB by either
> a blackhat or mistake by a developer caused by a mistake in
> configuration (leaving the port accessible) is definitely useful, even
> in the face of max_connections. My production apps already have
> their connections and seldom need new ones. They all use CPU though.
If KaiGai updates the code per previous discussion, would you be
willing to take a crack at adding documentation?
P.S. Your email client seems to be setting the Reply-To address to a
ridiculous value.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-11-17 17:18:04 | Re: Extensible executor nodes for preparation of SQL/MED |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-11-17 17:16:07 | Re: Indent authentication overloading |