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

Re: Index build temp files

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>,Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index build temp files
Date: 2013-01-10 02:59:09
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 02:48:23AM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 10 January 2013 02:36, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 03:20:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> What would people think of just eliminating the access-permissions
> >> checks involved in temp_tablespaces?  It would likely be appropriate to
> >> change temp_tablespaces from USERSET to SUSET if we did so.  So
> >> essentially the worldview would become that the DBA is responsible for
> >> the temp_tablespaces setting, not individual users.
> >
> > Allowing that the new behavior could be clearer, that gain is too small to
> > justify the application compatibility hazard of making temp_tablespaces SUSET.
> > I don't see something we can do here that clearly improves things overall.
> Can't we do both behaviours? Skip permissions if using a value form
> .conf, but don't if the user sets it themselves.

We could, though I share Tom's reluctance[1].


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Noah MischDate: 2013-01-10 03:11:36
Subject: Re: lazy_vacuum_heap()'s removal of HEAPTUPLE_DEAD tuples
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2013-01-10 02:48:23
Subject: Re: Index build temp files

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group