Re: Proposal: Snapshot cloning

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
Cc: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Snapshot cloning
Date: 2007-01-26 16:40:38
Message-ID: 25068.1169829638@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> writes:
> hel kenal peval, N, 2007-01-25 kell 22:19, kirjutas Jan Wieck:
>> The cloning process needs to make sure that the clone_snapshot() call is
>> made from the same DB user in the same database as corresponding
>> publish_snapshot() call was done.

> Why ? Snapshot is universal and same for whole db instance, so why limit
> it to same user/database ?

Yeah. Use-case: pg_dumpall could guarantee that it produces consistent
snapshots across multiple databases. (Not sure I actually want that,
but it's at least arguably useful to someone.)

I think you would want to mark a snapshot with an owner, but that would
be for the purpose of restricting who could take it down, not who could
copy it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2007-01-26 16:47:32 Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2007-01-26 16:37:29 Re: Implied Functional index use (redux)