From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PG in container w/ pid namespace is init, process exits cause restart |
Date: | 2021-05-06 01:16:42 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoamiQAKxXQPtwOOSX+NNREMGP4dyhM3nzzkpDzm7awNWg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 4:35 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'm still thinking that we're best off refusing to do
> that and making people install one of these shims that's meant
> for the job.
I have to admit that I care less about the specific issue here than
about the general issue of being open to hearing what the user needs
actually are. I honestly have no idea whether it's sensible to want to
run postgres as init. If people who know about container stuff say
that's a dumb idea and you shouldn't do it, then IMHO your conclusion
that we should simply disallow it is 100% correct. But if those people
show up and say, no, it's actually super-convenient for postgres to
run as init and using one of those shim things has significant
downsides that are hard to mitigate, and if further we could do what
they say they need with just a little bit of extra code, then IMHO
your conclusion is 100% wrong. Now so far as I can see right now
neither conclusion is crystal clear - opinions seem to be a bit mixed.
So right now I don't really know what to think. I just don't want to
fall into the trap of thinking that core developers are somehow in a
better place to know the right answer than users.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2021-05-06 01:26:22 | Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-05-06 01:10:08 | Re: Dubious assertion in RegisterDynamicBackgroundWorker |