| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)copelandconsulting(dot)net>, Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Upgrading rant. |
| Date: | 2003-01-06 03:56:13 |
| Message-ID: | 25271.1041825373@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> ... On top of that, that's also the risk of someone being a
>> superuser. They will ALWAYS have the power to hose things. Period. As
>> such, I don't consider that to be a valid argument.
> That was my feeling too. If you can't trust the other admins, it is
> hard for us to trust them either.
Sigh. It's not about trust: it's about whether pg_upgrade can enforce
or at least check its assumptions. I don't feel that it's a
production-grade tool as long as it has to cross its fingers that the
DBA made no mistakes.
Also, if the previous example had no impact on you, try this one:
$ postmaster -N 1 -c superuser_reserved_connections=0 &
$ pg_dumpall
pg_dump: [archiver (db)] connection to database "regression" failed: FATAL: Sorry, too many clients already
pg_dumpall: pg_dump failed on regression, exiting
$
-N 1 *will* cause problems.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-01-06 04:04:59 | Re: Upgrading rant. |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-06 03:40:46 | Re: AclId is defined in the wrong place |