| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: HOT - whats next ? |
| Date: | 2007-03-05 20:45:24 |
| Message-ID: | 22212.1173127524@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> The earlier objections to AdminPack were about functions that write to
> files. These functions just read data, not write them. So there's no
> objection there, AFAICS.
Au contraire, both reading and writing are issues. But I had
misunderstood your original proposal as being for functions that would
read/write arbitrary files, so limiting it to access to database tables
(and making it superuser-only) probably is sufficient to cure that complaint.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | A.M. | 2007-03-05 20:55:49 | Re: COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2007-03-05 20:45:04 | Re: Bug: Buffer cache is not scan resistant |