Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

Sawada, * Sawada Masahiko (sawada.m...@gmail.com) wrote: > Thank you for reviewing. > I agree with this. > Attached patch is updated version v10. Committed with quite a few additional changes and improvements. Please take a look, test, and let me know if you see any issues or have any concerns.

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 6:31 AM, David Steele wrote: > On 4/29/15 5:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:40 PM, David Steele wrote: >>> >>>The view pg_file_settings provides access to >>> run-time parameters >>>that are defined in configuration files via SQL. In cont

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 4/29/15 5:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:40 PM, David Steele wrote: >> >>The view pg_file_settings provides access to >> run-time parameters >>that are defined in configuration files via SQL. In contrast to >>pg_settings a row is provided for each >> occur

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:40 PM, David Steele wrote: > >The view pg_file_settings provides access to > run-time parameters >that are defined in configuration files via SQL. In contrast to >pg_settings a row is provided for each > occurrence >of the parameter in a configuration

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed Looks good - ready for committer. The new status of this pat

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:20 AM, David Steele wrote: > On 4/27/15 10:37 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: >> >> Thank you for your reviewing. >> Attached v8 patch is latest version. > > I posted a review through the CF app but it only went to the list > instead of recipients of the latest message. inst

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 4/27/15 10:37 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > > Thank you for your reviewing. > Attached v8 patch is latest version. I posted a review through the CF app but it only went to the list instead of recipients of the latest message. install-checkworld is failing but the fix is pretty trivial. See: h

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, failed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed Looks good overall, but make installcheck-world does not pass

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:22 AM, David Steele wrote: > On 4/27/15 10:31 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: >> Thank you for your review comment! >> The latest patch is attached. > > Looks good overall - a few more comments below: Thank you for your reviewing. Attached v8 patch is latest version. > diff

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 4/27/15 10:31 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > Thank you for your review comment! > The latest patch is attached. Looks good overall - a few more comments below: diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml + + seqno + integer + Sequence number of current vi

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 3:40 AM, David Steele wrote: >> On 4/4/15 9:21 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: >>> I added documentation changes to patch is attached. >>> Also I tried to use memory context for allocation of guc_file_variable >>> in To

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 3:40 AM, David Steele wrote: > On 4/4/15 9:21 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: >> I added documentation changes to patch is attached. >> Also I tried to use memory context for allocation of guc_file_variable >> in TopMemoryContext, >> but it was failed access after received SIGHU

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 4/4/15 9:21 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > I added documentation changes to patch is attached. > Also I tried to use memory context for allocation of guc_file_variable > in TopMemoryContext, > but it was failed access after received SIGHUP. Below is my review of the v5 patch: diff --git a/doc/src

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:46 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> Sawada, >> >> * Sawada Masahiko (sawada.m...@gmail.com) wrote: >>> Thank you for your review! >>> Attached file is the latest version (without document patch. I making it >>> now.

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Sawada, > > * Sawada Masahiko (sawada.m...@gmail.com) wrote: >> Thank you for your review! >> Attached file is the latest version (without document patch. I making it >> now.) >> As per discussion, there is no change regarding of super user

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote: > > --- a/src/backend/catalog/system_views.sql > > +++ b/src/backend/catalog/system_views.sql > > @@ -414,6 +414,11 @@ CREATE RULE pg_settings_n AS > > > > GRANT SELECT, UPDATE ON pg_settings TO PUBLIC; > > > > +CREATE VIEW pg_file_settings AS > > +

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

Sawada, * Sawada Masahiko (sawada.m...@gmail.com) wrote: > Thank you for your review! > Attached file is the latest version (without document patch. I making it now.) > As per discussion, there is no change regarding of super user permission. Ok. Here's another review. > diff --git a/src/backen

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote: > On 3/3/15 5:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > One aspect of this that merits some thought is that in some cases > > access to some set of functions is best granted as a unit. That's > > easy with role properties but much less so with plain GRANT. > > Do we ha

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote: > On 3/3/15 5:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > For my part, I understood that we specifically didn't want to allow that > > for the same reason that we didn't want to simply depend on the GRANT > > system for the above functions, but everyone else on these

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Sawada, > > * Sawada Masahiko (sawada.m...@gmail.com) wrote: >> Attached patch is latest version including following changes. >> - This view is available to super use only >> - Add sourceline coulmn > > Alright, first off, to Josh's point- I'

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 3/3/15 5:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > For my part, I understood that we specifically didn't want to allow that > for the same reason that we didn't want to simply depend on the GRANT > system for the above functions, but everyone else on these discussions > so far is advocating for using the GR

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 3/3/15 5:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: >> It's not a documented policy but it's certainly what a whole slew of >> functions *do*. Including pg_start_backup, pg_stop_backup, >> pg_switch_xlog, pg_rotate_logfile, pg_create_restore_point, >> pg_xlog_replay_pause, lo_import, lo_ex

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 3/2/15 4:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> While this generally "works", the usual expectation is that functions >> that should be superuser-only have a check in the function rather than >> depending on the execute privilege. I'm certainly ha

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote: > pg_start_backup, pg_stop_backup, pg_switch_xlog, pg_rotate_logfile, > pg_create_restore_point, pg_xlog_replay_pause, lo_import, lo_export, > and pg_xlog_replay_resume. Meh, that list was too hastily copied and pasted from my earlier email. lo_import an

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

Jim, * Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote: > On 3/3/15 5:22 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > >The > >problem with the role attribute approach is that they aren't inheirted > >the way GRANTs are, which means you can't have a "backup" role that is > >then granted out to users, you'd have to set a

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 3/3/15 5:22 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: The problem with the role attribute approach is that they aren't inheirted the way GRANTs are, which means you can't have a "backup" role that is then granted out to users, you'd have to set a "BACKUP" role attribute for every role added. Yeah, but you'd

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > The discussion I'm having with Peter on another thread is a very similar > > case that should be looping in, which is if we should continue to have > > any superuser check on updating catalog tables. He is advocating that > > we r

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

Stephen Frost writes: > It's not a documented policy but it's certainly what a whole slew of > functions *do*. Including pg_start_backup, pg_stop_backup, > pg_switch_xlog, pg_rotate_logfile, pg_create_restore_point, > pg_xlog_replay_pause, lo_import, lo_export, and pg_xlog_replay_resume, > pg_rea

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> -1. If that policy exists at all, it's a BAD policy, because it >> prevents users from changing the permissions using DDL. I think the >> superuser check should be inside the function, when, for example, it >> masks some of the output data

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > While this generally "works", the usual expectation is that functions > > that should be superuser-only have a check in the function rather than > > depending on the execute privilege. I'm ce

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 2/27/15 11:27 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >@@ -344,6 +346,21 @@ ProcessConfigFile(GucContext context) >PGC_BACKEND, PGC_S_DYNAMIC_DEFAULT); >} > >+ guc_file_variables = (ConfigFileVariable *) >+ guc_malloc(FATAL, num_guc_file_va

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > While this generally "works", the usual expectation is that functions > that should be superuser-only have a check in the function rather than > depending on the execute privilege. I'm certainly happy to debate the > merits of that approach

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

Sawada, * Sawada Masahiko (sawada.m...@gmail.com) wrote: > Attached patch is latest version including following changes. > - This view is available to super use only > - Add sourceline coulmn Alright, first off, to Josh's point- I'm definitely interested in a capability to show where the heck a g

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Sawada Masahiko > wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> David Johnston writes: On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, David Fetter wrote: > Why might the contents of pg_sett

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> David Johnston writes: >>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, David Fetter wrote: Why might the contents of pg_settings be different from what would be in pg_file_settings, apa

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Johnston writes: >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, David Fetter wrote: >>> Why might the contents of pg_settings be different from what would be >>> in pg_file_settings, apart from the existence of this column? > >> The contents of pg_s

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

David Johnston writes: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, David Fetter wrote: >> Why might the contents of pg_settings be different from what would be >> in pg_file_settings, apart from the existence of this column? > ​​The contents of pg_settings uses the setting name as a primary key. > T

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, David Fetter wrote: > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 12:50:20AM +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > > > > [postgres][5432](1)=# select * from pg_file_settings where name = > 'work_mem'; > > -[ RECORD 1 ]-- > > name |

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 12:50:20AM +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 12:24 AM, David Fetter wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 09:38:10PM +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > >> > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Tom Lane

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 12:58 AM, Mike Blackwell wrote: > This would default to being available to superusers only, right? Details of > the file system shouldn't be available to any random user. > This WIP patch does not behave like that, but I agree. This view would be effective combine with AL

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

​This would default to being available to superusers only, right? Details of the file system shouldn't be available to any random user.​ __ *Mike Blackwell | Technical Analyst, Distribution Services/Rollout Management

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 12:24 AM, David Fetter wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 09:38:10PM +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> David Johnston writes: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:04

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 09:38:10PM +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> David Johnston writes: > >>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Is that a requirement, and if so

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> David Johnston writes: >>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Is that a requirement, and if so why? Because this proposal doesn't guarantee any such knowledge AFAIC

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Johnston writes: >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Is that a requirement, and if so why? Because this proposal doesn't >>> guarantee any such knowledge AFAICS. > >> The proposal provides for SQL access to all possibl

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:36 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: > > > Would this view have a row for every option in a config file? IE: if you set > something in both postgresql.conf and postgresql.auto.conf, would it show up > twice? I think it should, and that there should be a way to see which > setting is a

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > I know what the proposal is. What I am questioning is the use-case that > justifies having us build and support all this extra mechanism. How often > does anyone need to know what the "next down" variable value would be? I would say not that

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 01/22/2015 02:09 PM, David Johnston wrote: > ​The proposal provides for SQL access to all possible sources of > variable value setting and, ideally, a means of ordering them in > priority order, so that a search for TimeZone would return two records, > one for postgresql.auto.conf and one for po

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Johnston writes: > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Is that a requirement, and if so why? Because this proposal doesn't > >> guarantee any such knowledge AFAICS. > > > ​The proposal provides for SQL access to all p

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

David Johnston writes: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Is that a requirement, and if so why? Because this proposal doesn't >> guarantee any such knowledge AFAICS. > ​The proposal provides for SQL access to all possible sources of variable > value setting and, ideally, a

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David G Johnston writes: > > Tom Lane-2 wrote > >> regression=# alter system reset timezone; > >> ALTER SYSTEM > >> regression=# select pg_reload_conf(); > > > How does someone know that performing the above commands will result in > the > > Tim

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

David G Johnston writes: > Tom Lane-2 wrote >> regression=# alter system reset timezone; >> ALTER SYSTEM >> regression=# select pg_reload_conf(); > How does someone know that performing the above commands will result in the > TimeZone setting being changed from Asia/Shanghai to US/Eastern? Is th

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

Tom Lane-2 wrote > regression=# alter system reset timezone; > ALTER SYSTEM > regression=# select pg_reload_conf(); How does someone know that performing the above commands will result in the TimeZone setting being changed from Asia/Shanghai to US/Eastern? David J. -- View this message in con

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

Sawada Masahiko writes: > As per discussion > , > I would like to proposal new view like pg_file_settings to know detail > of config file via SQL. > - Background > In 9.4 postgresql.auto.conf

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

On 1/22/15 11:13 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote: Hi, As per discussion , I would like to proposal new view like pg_file_settings to know detail of config file via SQL. - Background In 9.4 postgre

[HACKERS] Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL

Hi, As per discussion , I would like to proposal new view like pg_file_settings to know detail of config file via SQL. - Background In 9.4 postgresql.auto.conf is added to support ALTER SYSTEM