| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Directory/File Access Permissions for COPY and Generic File Access Functions |
| Date: | 2014-10-28 13:32:49 |
| Message-ID: | 20141028133249.GN28859@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Andres Freund (andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> On 2014-10-28 09:24:18 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > There is no doubt that consensus on the desirability and design needs
> > to be reached before we can even consider committing it. I suspect
> > Adam posted it simply because he had identified issues himself and
> > wanted to make others aware that things had been fixed.
> >
> > That said, it sounds like the primary concern has been if we want this
> > feature at all and there hasn't been much discussion of the design
> > itself.
>
> Well, why waste time on the technical details when we haven't agreed
> that the feature is worthwile? Review bandwidth is a serious problem in
> this community.
Fair enough, and I'm happy to discuss that (and have been..); I was
simply objecting to the implication that the desirability concerns
raised were design concerns- the only design concern raised was wrt
it being possibly too heavyweight and the PGC_SUSET GUC suggestion (at
least, based on my re-reading of the thread..).
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-10-28 13:43:35 | Re: superuser() shortcuts |
| Previous Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2014-10-28 13:31:14 | Re: [WIP Patch] Using 128-bit integers for sum, avg and statistics aggregates |