Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22678.1346698296@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Hmm, after looking at src/port/kill.c it doesn't seem like there's much >> of a problem with doing that. I had had the idea that our kill >> emulation only worked within the backend environment, but of course >> pg_ctl wouldn't work if that were so. So this is easier than I thought. > Yeah, kill works fine from non-backend as long as the *receiver* has > our backend environment. I have another question after thinking about that for awhile: is there any security concern there? On Unix-oid systems, we expect the kernel to restrict who can do a kill() on a postgres process. If there's any similar restriction on who can send to that named pipe in the Windows version, it's not obvious from the code. Do we have/need any restriction there? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: