Re: A modest proposal: get rid of GUC's USERLIMIT variable category

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew McMillan <andrew(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: A modest proposal: get rid of GUC's USERLIMIT variable category
Date: 2004-11-10 16:45:39
Message-ID: 13420.1100105139@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew McMillan <andrew(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> writes:
> When tracking down gnarly problems in heavily multi-user applications
> enabling higher log levels at selective points has the potential to help
> _a lot_ with diagnostic detail, without smothering you in _every_
> detail.

Sure. As I pointed out in the other thread, if you want to allow an app
to do this, you can make available a SECURITY DEFINER function that
performs the desired SET on its behalf. By setting execute permissions
on the function and/or including restrictions in the function's code,
you can make this as tight or as loose a loophole as you like. So it's
certainly possible to do what you want in any case. I think the issue
at hand is what's appropriate to provide as hard-wired functionality.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-11-10 17:11:27 Re: CREATE or REPLACE function pg_catalog.*
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2004-11-10 14:54:50 Re: A modest proposal: get rid of GUC's USERLIMIT variable