Re: pg_upgrade and umask
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade and umask |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 29743.1331307713@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade and umask (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_upgrade and umask
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > The problem is that these files are being created often by shell > redirects, e.g. pg_dump -f out 2> log_file. There is no clean way to > control the file creation permissions in this case --- only umask gives > us a process-level setting. Actually, one crafty idea would be to do > the umask only when I exec something, and when I create the initial > files with the new banner you suggested. Let me look into that. You could create empty log files with the desired permissions, and then do the execs with >>log_file, and thereby not have to globally change umask. > Frankly, the permissions are already being modified by the default > umask, e.g. 0022. Do we want a zero umask? I'm not so worried about default umask; nobody's complained yet about wrong permissions on pg_upgrade output files. But umask 077 would be likely to do things like get rid of group access to postgresql.conf, which some people intentionally set. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: