Re: security labels on databases are bad for dump & restore

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
Subject: Re: security labels on databases are bad for dump & restore
Date: 2015-08-31 21:46:08
Message-ID: 20150831214608.GD17858@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:23:36PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
> > On 07/28/2015 11:58 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > I'd be strongly in favour of teaching GRANT, SECURITY LABEL, COMMENT
> > >> ON DATABASE, etc to recognise CURRENT_DATABASE as a keyword. Then
> > >> dumping them in pg_dump --create, and in pg_dump -Fc .
> > >>
> > >> In practice I see zero real use of pg_dumpall without --globals-only,
> > >> and almost everyone does pg_dump -Fc . I'd like to see that method
> > >> case actually preserve the whole state of the system and do the right
> > >> thing sensibly.
> > >>
> > >> A pg_restore option to skip database-level settings could be useful,
> > >> but I think by default they should be restored.
> >
> > +++++1
> >
> > Let's get rid of pg_dumpall -g.
>
> Quite the opposite, I think --- let's get rid of pg_dumpall EXCEPT when
> invoked as pg_dumpall -g.

Is this a TODO?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ Everyone has their own god. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-08-31 21:47:12 Re: Horizontal scalability/sharding
Previous Message David Fetter 2015-08-31 20:25:08 Re: Should \o mean "everything?"