| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net, chris+postgresql(at)qwirx(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Logical replication subscription owner |
| Date: | 2020-05-09 08:57:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20200509085701.GM11539@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 03:03:26PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Fri, 8 May 2020 01:02:11 -0400, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote in
>> On 2020-May-07, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> FWIW, I would argue that LOGIN permits logging in on a regular SQL
>>> connection, while REPLICATION should permit logging in on a
>>> replication connection, and there's no reason for either to depend on
>>> or require the other.
>>
>> I agree with this.
>
> I agree, too. Anyway, it is unreasonable that a user is banned for
> the lack of replication-attribute after a successful *replication*
> login.
Not to make the life of everybody more complicated here, but I don't
agree. LOGIN and REPLICATION are in my opinion completely orthogonal
and it sounds more natural IMO that a REPLICATION user should be able
to log into the server only if it has LOGIN defined.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-05-09 15:17:26 | Re: Logical replication subscription owner |
| Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2020-05-09 06:54:10 | Re: Another modest proposal for docs formatting: catalog descriptions |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ranier Vilela | 2020-05-09 09:48:59 | Re: [PATCH] Fix division by zero (explain.c) |
| Previous Message | Juan José Santamaría Flecha | 2020-05-09 08:51:36 | Re: stat() on Windows might cause error if target file is larger than 4GB |