On 9/24/14 4:58 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Alvaro, > > * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: >> I think the case for pgstat_get_backend_current_activity() and >> pg_stat_get_activity and the other pgstatfuncs.c callers is easy to make >> and seems acceptable to me; but I would leave pg_signal_backend out of >> that discussion, because it has a potentially harmful side effect. By >> requiring SET ROLE you add an extra layer of protection against >> mistakes. (Hopefully, pg_signal_backend() is not a routine thing for >> well-run systems, which means human intervention, and therefore the room >> for error isn't insignificant.) > > While I certainly understand where you're coming from, I don't really > buy into it. Yes, cancelling a query (the only thing normal users can > do anyway- they can't terminate backends) could mean the loss of any > in-progress work, but it's not like 'rm' and I don't see that it needs > to require extra hoops for individuals to go through.
It would be weird if it were inconsistent: some things require role membership, some things require SET ROLE. Try explaining that. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
