| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "David J(dot) MacKenzie" <djm(at)web(dot)us(dot)uu(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting support |
| Date: | 2000-11-14 01:14:32 |
| Message-ID: | 20067.974164472@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> I think we had some discussions about changing the way that shared
>> memory keys are generated, which might make this a less critical issue.
>> But until something's done about that, this patch looks awfully
>> dangerous.
> But do we yank it out for that reason? I don't think so.
Do you want to put a bright red "THIS FEATURE MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR
DATA" warning in the manual? I think it'd be rather irresponsible of
us to ship the patch without such a warning, unless someone builds a
replacement interlock capability (or gets rid of the need for the
interlock).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-11-14 01:16:42 | Re: Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting support |
| Previous Message | Philip Warner | 2000-11-14 01:08:59 | Re: CREATE MODULE (was: Coping with 'C' vs 'newC' function language names) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-11-14 01:16:42 | Re: Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting support |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-11-14 01:02:17 | Re: Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting support |