Re: [HACKERS] postmaster crash and .s.pgsql file

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Andrew Martin <martin(at)biochemistry(dot)ucl(dot)ac(dot)uk>
Cc: hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] postmaster crash and .s.pgsql file
Date: 1998-01-29 14:52:27
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.3.95.980129095036.7021J-100000@hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998, Andrew Martin wrote:

> > On Thu, 29 Jan 1998, Andrew Martin wrote:
> >
> > > > > I would opt for /var/run to store the pid files and have the name set to
> > > >
> > > > That would assume that postmaster runs as root, which is not
> > > > allowed...has to be in /tmp somewhere
> > > >
> > > > Maybe both should be under /usr/local/pgsql
> > > I assume you mean the root of the installation rather than specifically
> > > /usr/local/pgsql.
> > >
> > > > somewhere, so they will not be removed by any
> > > > '/tmp'-clean-up-scripts.
> > > >
> > > In $PGDATA would seem as good as anywhere (maybe $PGDATA/.run or some such)
> > >
> > > /usr/local is mounted r/o on my system - $PGDATA lives elsewhere and is
> > > writable.
> >
> > $PGDATA is created 700...general users need to be able to read the
> > directory in order to connect to the socket, so we'd have to lax up
> > security in order to accomplish this...
> >
> OK, no problem, a subdirectory of $PGDATA which has world read permission

You'd have to relax the 700 permissions on $PGDATA to get at
anything under that directory, even if the subdirectory under it had 777
access to it...

And, it also makes the assumption that you'll only ever have 1
postmaster process running on a machine, or else you are now having to set
the PGDATA environment variable depending on which database you want to
connect to...:(

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message James Hughes 1998-01-29 14:57:01 Re: [HACKERS] postmaster crash and .s.pgsql file
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-01-29 14:51:04 Re: [HACKERS] No: implied sort with group by