RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
От | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) |
---|---|
Тема | RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | OSCPR01MB14966EC12277712131EB8EDF1F5EEA@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Michael, > However, could there be more to consider here? Contrary to DROP > DATABASE, where we require the drop to be done by the owner of the > database (or a superuser), CREATE DATABASE has less requirements: it > is fine for a role to create a database if they have the CREATEDB > rights. If we allow bgworkers to be cancelled when the database they > are connected to is used as a source, that may be disruptive, so we > had better document precisely the behavior of the flag and what users > should expect from it when set. Actually, if the database is not marked as the template one, the user must be owner of the source or superuser. Not sure there is a real case that template database has dedicated workers, but anyway I do agree to note down this behavior. It is surprising that creating other databases lead the process terminations. Best regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: