Le 28/12/2010 19:30, Tom Lane a écrit :
> Gurjeet Singh <singh.gurjeet@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> SQL access is frequently more convenient, though. Although maybe now that
>>> we've made recovery.conf use the GUC lexer we oughta continue in that vein
>>> and expose those parameters as PGC_INTERNAL GUCs rather than inventing a new
>>> function for it...
>
>> +1 for SQL access, but exposing it via pg_settings opens up the security
>> problem as there might be sensitive info in those GUCs.
>
> IIRC we do have a GUC property that hides the value from non-superusers,
> so we could easily have a GUC that is equivalent to the proposed
> pg_primary_conninfo function. Of course this does nothing for my
> objections to the function. Also, I'm not sure how we'd deal with the
> state-dependency aspect of it (ie, value changes once you exit recovery
> mode).
>
We already have superuser GUC.
b1=> show data_directory;
ERROR: must be superuser to examine "data_directory"
We only need to do the same for primary_conninfo and trigger_file (as I
remember it, there are the only ones needing this).
--
Guillaumehttp://www.postgresql.frhttp://dalibo.com