On 2015-05-29 13:49:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2015-05-29 13:14:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Abhijit Menon-Sen <a...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > >> As I mentioned yesterday, I'm not really on board with ignoring EACCES, > >> except for the directories-on-Windows case. Since we're only logging > >> the failures anyway, I think it is reasonable to log a complaint for any > >> unwritable file in the data directory. > > > That sounds like a potentially nontrivial amount of repetitive log bleat > > after every crash start? One which the user can't really stop? > > Why can't the user stop it?
Because it makes a good amount of sense to have e.g. certificates not owned by postgres and not writeable? You don't necessarily want to symlink them somewhere else, because that makes moving clusters around harder than when they're self contained. > I'd say it's a pretty damn-fool arrangement: for starters, it's an > unnecessary security hazard. I don't buy the security argument at all. You likely have postgresql.conf in the data directoy. You can write to at least .auto, which will definitely reside the data directory. That contains archive_command. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
