| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Non-superuser subscription owners |
| Date: | 2021-11-17 04:11:59 |
| Message-ID: | aa28945f9f348307c8ac833a937b5fca732668b8.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2021-11-03 at 12:50 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> The first two patches are virtually unchanged. The third updates the
> behavior of the apply workers, and updates the documentation to
> match.
v2-0001 corrects some surprises, but may create others. Why is renaming
allowed, but not changing the options? What if we add new options, and
some of them seem benign for a non-superuser to change?
The commit message part of the patch says that it's to prevent non-
superusers from being able to (effectively) create subscriptions, but
don't we want privileged non-superusers to be able to create
subscriptions?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com | 2021-11-17 04:14:37 | RE: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress |
| Previous Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2021-11-17 04:00:04 | Re: postgres_fdw: commit remote (sub)transactions in parallel during pre-commit |