Re: pgaudit - an auditing extension for PostgreSQL

From: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ian Barwick <ian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Mlodgenski <jimmy76(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pgaudit - an auditing extension for PostgreSQL
Date: 2015-01-27 22:55:20
Message-ID: 54C81758.6030201@BlueTreble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1/26/15 4:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>> I don't disagree with you about any of that. I don't think you disagree
>> with my comment either. What I'm not entirely clear on is how consensus
>> could be reached. Leaving it dormant for the better part of a year
>> certainly doesn't appear to have helped that situation. We've discussed
>> having it be part of the main server and having it be a contrib module
>> and until about a week ago, I had understood that having it in contrib
>> would be preferrable. Based on the recent emails, it appears there's
>> been a shift of preference to having it be in-core, but clearly there's
>> no time left to do that in this release cycle.
>
> Well, I'm not sure that anyone else here agreed with me on that, and
> one person does not a consensus make no matter who it is. The basic
> problem here is that we don't seem to have even two people here who
> agree on how this ought to be done. The basic dynamic here seems to
> be you asking for changes and Abhijit making them but without any real
> confidence, and I don't feel good about that. I'm willing to defer to
> an emerging consensus here when there is one, but what Abhijit likes
> best is not a consensus, and neither is what you like, and neither is
> what I like. What we need is some people agreeing with each other.

BTW, I know that at least earlier versions of EnterpriseDB's version of Postgres (circa 2007) had an auditing feature. I never dealt with any customers who were using it when I was there, but perhaps some other folks could shed some light on what customers wanted to see an an auditing feature... (I'm looking at you, Jimbo!)
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2015-01-27 23:00:27 Re: a fast bloat measurement tool (was Re: Measuring relation free space)
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2015-01-27 22:47:10 Re: Providing catalog view to pg_hba.conf file - Patch submission