Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Re: Why READ ONLY transactions?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>,Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)libertyrms(dot)info>,pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org,Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>,Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Re: Why READ ONLY transactions?
Date: 2003-07-31 01:43:22
Message-ID: 200307310143.h6V1hMT10013@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Tom, have you considered using PGC_USERLIMIT for the existing
default_transaction_read_only variable?  You could allow admins to turn
it on and off, but non-admins could only turn it on.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org> writes:
> >> I'm not objecting to the idea of being able to make users read-only.
> >> I'm objecting to using GUC for it.  Send in a patch that, say, adds
> >> a bool column to pg_shadow, and I'll be happy.
> 
> > How is that any different than ALTER USER [username] SET
> > jail_read_only_transactions TO true?  It sets something in
> > pg_shadow.useconfig column, which is permanent.
> 
> But it has to go through a mechanism that is designed and built to allow
> that value to be overridden from other places.  I think using GUC for
> this is just asking for trouble.  Even if there is no security hole
> today, it's very easy to imagine future changes in GUC that would
> unintentionally create one.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
>       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
> 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-07-31 02:09:21
Subject: Re: compile failure
Previous:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2003-07-31 01:37:04
Subject: Re: using adbin, conbin, etc.

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-07-31 03:56:07
Subject: Re: hexadecimal to decimal
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-07-31 01:29:37
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Why READ ONLY transactions?

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-07-31 01:45:34
Subject: Re: What I would say if someone asked me about no win32
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-07-31 01:39:24
Subject: Re: What I would say if someone asked me about no win32

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group