Re: pg_rewind vs superuser

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_rewind vs superuser
Date: 2019-04-04 10:43:10
Message-ID: 20190404104310.GL7693@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 10:18:45AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Looks good. Maybe we should list the "role having sufficient permissions"
> before superuser, "just because", but not something I feel strongly about.

Listing the superuser after sounds fine to me.

> The part about CHECKPOINT also looks pretty good, but that's entirely
> unrelated, right? :)

Completely unrelated, but as we are on this part of the documentation
now, and as we discussed that stuff face-to-face last September where
I actually promised to write a patch without doing it for seven
months, I see no problems to tackle this issue as well now. Better
later than never :)

I would like to apply this down to 9.5 for the checkpoint part and
down to 11 for the role part, so if anybody has any comments, please
feel free.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2019-04-04 10:47:26 Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue
Previous Message Amit Langote 2019-04-04 10:41:53 Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table