Re: Make SIGHUP less painful if pg_hba.conf is not readable

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Selena Deckelmann <selena(at)endpoint(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Make SIGHUP less painful if pg_hba.conf is not readable
Date: 2009-03-05 19:16:19
Message-ID: 200903052116.20642.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thursday 05 March 2009 18:04:42 Joshua Tolley wrote:
> As an aside, is access() adequately portable, ok to use within the
> backend, etc.? I just sort of took a shot in the dark.

Using access() is usually not a good idea. In this case it would be better to
check the return of the actual open() call for EPERM (or the equivalent for
fopen(), whatever is used).

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2009-03-05 19:19:05 Re: Make SIGHUP less painful if pg_hba.conf is not readable
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2009-03-05 19:15:26 Re: Expanding the length of a VARCHAR column should not induce a table rewrite