From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ALTER SYSTEM vs symlink |
Date: | 2015-11-02 17:58:01 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYPkp8pXyvgKfbHdk7Qy=wsOPKvcz76WEcoOCqTeBjzgw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> This is all very environment specific. Changes to postgresql.conf, in
> many environments, go through a serious of tests before being deployed
> by a CM system. How do we accomplish the same kind of tests before
> deploying a change with ALTER SYSTEM? We provide no mechanism to do
> that today.
We provide no mechanism to put the changes to put postgresql.conf
changes through a series of tests before being deployed by a CM
system, either. But you can do that if you want.
Two different methods of restricting ALTER SYSTEM have already been
discussed on this thread: one using file permissions, and the other
using ProcessUtility_hook. I personally think that's good enough.
It's true that you could have a separate GUC for it, but then somebody
could lock themselves out by turning the GUC on using ALTER SYSTEM, so
now you've made things easier for one group of users while creating a
new pitfall for another group of users. I'm not sure we really come
out ahead, there.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-11-02 18:03:38 | Re: WIP: Rework access method interface |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2015-11-02 17:51:03 | Re: ALTER SYSTEM vs symlink |