| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions |
| Date: | 2010-12-27 15:33:53 |
| Message-ID: | 14807.1293464033@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 10:53, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> We could quite easily make a replication role *never* be able to
>> connect to a non-walsender backend. That would mean that if you set
>> your role to WITH REPLICATION, it can *only* be used for replication
>> and nothing else (well, you could still SET ROLE to it, but given that
>> it's not a superuser (anymore), that doesn't have any security
>> implications.
> Actually, having implemented that and tested it, I realize that's a
> pretty bad idea.
OK, so if we're not going to recommend that REPLICATION roles be
NOLOGIN, we're back to the original question: should the REPLICATION
bit give any other special privileges? I can see the point of allowing
such a user to issue pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-12-27 15:40:10 | Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-12-27 15:24:20 | Re: Reduce lock levels for ADD and DROP COLUMN |