| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT. |
| Date: | 2021-11-09 00:13:17 |
| Message-ID: | c5d7045507b0ccac7d9421f52bf3b59b60e1150b.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2021-11-08 at 12:47 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> I don't feel as strongly as others apparently do on this point
> though,
> and I'd rather have non-superusers able to run CHECKPOINT *somehow*
> than not, so if the others feel like a predefined role is a better
> approach then I'm alright with that. Seems a bit overkill to me but
> it's also not like it's actually all that much code or work to do.
+1. It seems like the pg_checkpointer predefined role is the most
acceptable to everyone (even if not universally liked).
Attached a rebased version of that patch.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pg-checkpointer-role.diff | text/x-patch | 3.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-11-09 00:53:15 | Re: Make mesage at end-of-recovery less scary. |
| Previous Message | Greg Nancarrow | 2021-11-08 23:50:03 | Re: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress |