Re: proposal: hide application_name from other users

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Harold Giménez
Тема Re: proposal: hide application_name from other users
Дата
Msg-id CACZOJr8SXHHH+iZ+etprTajVZG7jJgWNa7=wDC+7GyTDWUDr9w@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: proposal: hide application_name from other users  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Ответы Re: proposal: hide application_name from other users  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 03:57:37PM -0800, Harold Giménez wrote:
>> > It also means that monitoring tools must run as superuser to see
>> > information they require, which to me is a total showstopper.
>>
>>
>> Well, the fact is that if you don't run monitoring tools as superuser,
>> there may not be enough connection slots available anyways, in cases
>> where actual usage is consuming all of max_connections, and only the
>> reserved slots are available. So in a way it's already unreliable to
>> run monitoring as non-superuser unfortunately.
>
> You might need to run as superuser in these cases, but it is hard to see
> why would need to do that in the normal case.

Definitely agree with you. This is just an example of how running
monitoring as superuser is not necessarily the worst thing, and there
are other reasons to do it already.

-Harold



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Harold Giménez
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: proposal: hide application_name from other users
Следующее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)