Re: pg_cancel_backend by non-superuser

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kääriäinen Anssi
Тема Re: pg_cancel_backend by non-superuser
Дата
Msg-id BC19EF15D84DC143A22D6A8F2590F0A78864133047@EXMAIL.stakes.fi
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_cancel_backend by non-superuser  (Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
"""
In *every* case -- and there are many -- where we've had people
express pain, this would have sufficed.  Usually the problem is a
large index creation gone awry, or an automated backup process
blocking a schema change that has taken half the locks it needs, or
something like that -- all by the same role that is under control of
the folks feeling distress.  If this minimal set is uncontroversial, I
would like to see that much committed and then spend some time
hand-wringing on whether to extend it.

If one does want to extend it, I think role inheritance makes the most
sense: a child role should be able to cancel its parent role's
queries, and not vice-versa. Since one can use SET ROLE in this case
anyway to basically act on behalf on that role, I think that, too,
should be uncontroversial.
"""

I would be a step in the right direction if the DB owner would see all queries
to the DB in pg_stat_activity.
- Anssi

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Daniel Farina
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_cancel_backend by non-superuser
Следующее
От: Joshua Brindle
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: contrib/sepgsql regression tests are a no-go