| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_basebackup ignores the existing data directory permissions |
| Date: | 2019-03-26 02:26:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20190326022658.GP2558@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 10:30:47PM +1100, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> With the above additional options, the pg_basebackup is able to control
> the access permissions of the backup files, but when it comes to tar mode
> all the files are sent from the server and stored as it is in backup, to
> support
> tar mode group access mode control, the BASE BACKUP protocol is
> enhanced with new option GROUP_MODE 'none' or GROUP_MODE 'group'
> to control the file permissions before they are sent to backup. Sending
> GROUP_MODE to the server depends on the -g option received to the
> pg_basebackup utility.
Do we really want to extend the replication protocol to control that?
I am really questioning if we should keep this stuff isolated within
pg_basebackup or not. At the same time, it may be confusing to have
BASE_BACKUP only use the permissions inherited from the data
directory, so some input from folks maintaining an external backup
tool is welcome.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-03-26 02:29:30 | Re: Special role for subscriptions |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-03-26 02:20:07 | Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb |