Re: Non-superuser subscription owners

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Non-superuser subscription owners
Date: 2021-11-02 15:17:48
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZAKX_PhPcwCTwpNOVo=jV0FAnki+weOsxB2JJLW9p3DA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 6:44 PM Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > ALTER SUBSCRIPTION..[ENABLE | DISABLE] do not synchronously start or stop subscription workers. The ALTER command updates the catalog's subenabled field, but workers only lazily respond to that. Disabling and enabling the subscription as part of the OWNER TO would not reliably accomplish anything.
>
> Having discussed this with Andrew off-list, we've concluded that updating the documentation for logical replication to make this point more clear is probably sufficient, but I wonder if anyone thinks otherwise?

The question in my mind is whether there's some reasonable amount of
time that a user should expect to have to wait for the changes to take
effect. If it could easily happen that the old permissions are still
in use a month after the change is made, I think that's probably not
good. If there's reason to think that, barring unusual circumstances,
changes will be noticed within a few minutes, I think that's fine.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bossart, Nathan 2021-11-02 15:26:04 Re: archive modules
Previous Message Bossart, Nathan 2021-11-02 15:14:01 Re: archive modules