Re: [HACKERS] VACUUM as a denial-of-service attack

Keith Parks <emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
>> From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
>> I think a reasonable answer to this is to restrict VACUUM on any
>> table to be allowed only to the table owner and Postgres superuser.
>> Does anyone have an objection or better idea?

> In the dim and distant past I produced a patch that put vacuum
> into the list of things that you could GRANT on a per-table
> basis. I don't know what effort it would take to rework that
> for current or if it would be worth it.

Thanks for the code, but for now I just threw in a quick pg_ownercheck
call: VACUUM will now vacuum all tables if you are the superuser, else
just the tables you own, skipping the rest with a NOTICE. What you had
looked like more infrastructure than I thought the problem was worth...
I suspect most people will run VACUUMs from the superuser account
anyway...

regards, tom lane