Re: A modest proposal: get rid of GUC's USERLIMIT

Andrew McMillan wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Wed, 2004-11-10 at 11:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andrew McMillan <andrew@catalyst.net.nz> writes:
> > > When tracking down gnarly problems in heavily multi-user applications
> > > enabling higher log levels at selective points has the potential to help
> > > _a lot_ with diagnostic detail, without smothering you in _every_
> > > detail.
> > 
> > Sure.  As I pointed out in the other thread, if you want to allow an app
> > to do this, you can make available a SECURITY DEFINER function that
> > performs the desired SET on its behalf.  By setting execute permissions
> > on the function and/or including restrictions in the function's code,
> > you can make this as tight or as loose a loophole as you like.  So it's
> > certainly possible to do what you want in any case.  I think the issue
> > at hand is what's appropriate to provide as hard-wired functionality.
> 
> That sounds excellent - I hadn't realised that this workaround would be
> possible, and indeed with this in place that will provide even better
> control over the facility.

OK, here is one vote for the ALTER USER/remove USERLIMIT croud, and you
were the person who originally mentioned the problem.  You don't think
the function creation is hard.  Perhaps that's the way to go then.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073