On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 09:15:52AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Personally, I do like the idea of a user-level 'copy server-side files'
> permission that could be granted to reduce the need for things to run as
> superuser.
There is one important point though: The server copying things is
serio
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 08:03:39AM -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Bernard wrote:
>
> > But we can take this one step further so that we don't even need to
> > trust ourselves:
> >
> > The logical next step is that for a non-postgresql-superuser user,
> > COPY FROM files have to
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Bernard wrote:
> But we can take this one step further so that we don't even need to
> trust ourselves:
>
> The logical next step is that for a non-postgresql-superuser user,
> COPY FROM files have to be world-readable and COPY TO files and
> directories have to be world-writa
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 09:15:52AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Personally, I do like the idea of a user-level 'copy server-side files'
>> permission that could be granted to reduce the need for things to run as
>> superuser.
> There is one important point thoug
Bernard schrieb:
Andrew
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:17:16 -, you wrote:
In the majority of bulk load cases, the input exists as a file already
But not necessarily on the server.
True. But I am concerned with the server, and there I want that things
are handled on the server, not on the cl
Oliver Jowett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bernard was also objecting to the overhead of pushing the data down a
> TCP pipe when it's already available locally, I think.. I didn't find
> any real difference there when I compared the two methods, though.
What makes you think it's necessarily ava
Sean,
Very diplomatic way to get the message across without offending anyone
except the bastards.
Capatalism is good for development. But it has to be kept in check as
to not destroy the basis on which it once grew and provided fair
chances for anyone to participate. Who is keeping it in check to
Greg Stark wrote:
Oliver Jowett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bernard was also objecting to the overhead of pushing the data down a
TCP pipe when it's already available locally, I think.. I didn't find
any real difference there when I compared the two methods, though.
What makes you think it'
Republicans, or Conservatives --- unless they have failed to
>speak out against those who usurp their identity.)
>
>Sean
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -
>From: "Bernard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Greg Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ;
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 12:21 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [BUGS] BUG #1830: Non-super-user must be able to copy
from a
Greg,
The desired COPY FILE functionality for a local non-superuser user
would require a local file. That file is available locally.
A suggested
Greg,
The desired COPY FILE functionality for a local non-superuser user
would require a local file. That file is available locally.
A suggested workaround COPY with STDIN would involve the TCP pipe.
This does of course have the support for remote uploads.
But I am not currently interested in re
[ A bit off topic, but... ]
Oliver Jowett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And please fix your anti-spam system so it doesn't send me a "you must
> jump through these hoops to send me email" message every time please!
It's standard policy on the PG lists that we boot subscribers who
auto-reply to li
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 10:16:29AM +1200, Bernard wrote:
> Bruno and interested list members
>
> I want to follow what is suggested here. How are STDIN and STDOUT
> addressed when using the JDBC driver?
>
> Or in other words where can I write or receive megabytes of data?
I don't know how JDBC d
13 matches
Mail list logo
