Re: pg_rewind vs superuser
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-04-04T10:43:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 10:18:45AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Looks good. Maybe we should list the "role having sufficient permissions" > before superuser, "just because", but not something I feel strongly about. Listing the superuser after sounds fine to me. > The part about CHECKPOINT also looks pretty good, but that's entirely > unrelated, right? :) Completely unrelated, but as we are on this part of the documentation now, and as we discussed that stuff face-to-face last September where I actually promised to write a patch without doing it for seven months, I see no problems to tackle this issue as well now. Better later than never :) I would like to apply this down to 9.5 for the checkpoint part and down to 11 for the role part, so if anybody has any comments, please feel free. -- Michael
Commits
-
Fix some documentation in pg_rewind
- 1f63f69c43b5 9.5.17 landed
- 7ff7c0d7b71c 9.6.13 landed
- 4b482e94a006 10.8 landed
- 064b3fcbdb19 11.3 landed
- bfc80683ce51 12.0 landed