Re: pg_rewind vs superuser
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-04-04T11:19:44Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 12:43 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > 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 :) > :) Nope, I definitely think we need to include that. 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. > All of it, or just the checkpoint part? I assume just the checkpoint part? AFAIK it does require superuser in those earlier versions? -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
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