Re: Audit of logout

From: David G Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Audit of logout
Date: 2014-06-13 16:07:42
Message-ID: 1402675662004-5807224.post@n5.nabble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane-2 wrote
> Another answer is to make both variables PGC_SIGHUP, on the grounds
> that it doesn't make much sense for them not to be applied system-wide;
> except that I think there was some idea that logging might be enabled
> per-user or per-database using ALTER ROLE/DATABASE.

From a trouble-shooting standpoint if I know that client software in
question is focused on particular users/databases being able to only enable
connection logging for those would make sense. Whether that is a true
production concern is another matter but the possibility does exist.

I personally do not get how a logoff is a risk auditing event. Logons and
actual queries I can understand.

For the same reason keeping them separate has merit since for imaginable
circumstances the logoffs are noise but the logons are important - and
forcing them to be on/off in tandem disallows the option to remove the noise
from the logs.

David J.

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Audit-of-logout-tp5806985p5807224.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabrízio de Royes Mello 2014-06-13 16:28:32 Re: How to change the pgsql source code and build it??
Previous Message David Johnston 2014-06-13 15:57:06 Re: PL/pgSQL support to define multi variables once