Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag
От | Drouvot, Bertrand |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2b530754-56c0-4272-a326-11d30a0bca55@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag
Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 10/10/23 7:58 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 06:57:05AM +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: >> Please find attached v9 (v8 rebase due to f483b2090). > > I was looking at v8 just before you sent this v9, and still got > annoyed by the extra boolean argument added to InitPostgres(). Arf, I did not look at it as I had in mind to look at it once this one is in. > So > please let me propose to bite the bullet and refactor that, as of the > 0001 attached that means less diff footprints in all the callers of > InitPostgres() (I am not wedded to the flag names). Thanks for having looked at it! + bits32 init_flags = 0; /* never honor session_preload_libraries */ Also a few word about datallowconn in the comment? (as the flag deals with both). > > It looks like 0002 had the same issues as f483b209: the worker that > could not be started because of the login restriction could be > detected as stopped by worker_spi_launch(), causing the script to fail > hard. > > 0002 is basically your v9, able to work with the refactoring from > 0001. Thanks! #define INIT_PG_OVERRIDE_ALLOW_CONNS 0x0002 +#define INIT_PG_BYPASS_ROLE_LOGIN 0x0004 Any reason why INIT_PG_BYPASS_ROLE_LOGIN is not 0x0003? Except that it does look good to me. Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: