Re: pg_upgrade using appname to lock out other users
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-06-17T20:03:08Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On ons, 2011-06-15 at 17:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> On non-Windows servers you could get this even safer by disabling the > >> TCP/IP socket altogether, and placing the Unix-domain socket in a > >> private temporary directory. The "port" wouldn't actually matter then. > > > Yes, it would be nice to just create the socket in the current > > directory. The fact it doesn't work on Windows would cause our docs to > > have to differ for Windows, which seems unfortunate. > > It still wouldn't be bulletproof against someone running as the postgres > user, so probably not worth the trouble. But the postgres user would normally be the DBA itself, so it'd be his own fault. I don't see how you can easily make any process safe from interference by the same user account.