On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 06:52:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 10:53:23AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 03:11:44PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > Is this correct? Do we have proper super-user restrictions on all the
> > > right fields now?
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what the security problem would be for allowing non-superusers to
> > > run pg_is_xlog_replay_paused(). And if there are none, there is no reason why
> > > the function should be restricted like that.
> > >
> > > Also, looking at that specific documentation page, ISTM it needs a better way
> > > to show which functions actually *do* require superuser privileges. In some
> > > groups it states which do require it, and in some where it doesn't. Perhaps we
> > > should add a column to each of the tables with a yes/no value indicating if
> > > superuser is required for that specific function? Or at least have every table
> > > be prefixed by a statement saying which require superuser.
> >
> > Well, right now we seem to have an inconsistent setup that is being
> > complained about regularly. Who can review it all and make a
> > recommendation? Should we just hold all this for 9.5?
>
> I have developed the attached patch. I marked the xlog replay
> pause/resume functions as super-user, and marked the replication slots
> as super-user. I don't see any other place that is missing or needs a
> section heading. I don't think we need a new column as most functions in
> a section are either super-user only or not.
Patch applied, backpatch to 9.4.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +