Re: Allow workers to override datallowconn

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Subject: Re: Allow workers to override datallowconn
Date: 2018-02-22 19:26:46
Message-ID: 20180222192646.q3tdcfdmetmmmpz7@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2018-02-22 20:24:03 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> In a background worker you can just set the parameter using
> SetConfigOption(), no? That seems a lot easier than turning things in to a
> kv pair and back...

Sure, but, it doesn't seem bad to offer the option to only allow this
for code running as superuser.

> I can see the point for having such a parameter for pg_upgrade, but I'm not
> sure we'd necessarily want to overload them.

What's the argument against?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2018-02-22 19:30:02 Re: Allow workers to override datallowconn
Previous Message Andres Freund 2018-02-22 19:24:37 Re: Online enabling of checksums