Re: SET variable - Permission issues

On 10/11/2011 02:07 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>  
>> This isn't exactly a trivial matter.  What happens for instance if
>> you try to change the limit, and there are already active values
>> outside the limit in some processes?
>  
> I would certainly vote for enforcing on the SET and not causing an
> error on the attempt to change the limit.  (Maybe a notice?)  At the
> time they set the GUC, they were allowed to do so.  It's a bit like
> revoking a user's right to create a table in a schema -- what if
> they've already done so?  You leave the table and you don't let them
> create another.
>  
> What problems do you see with that?

Yeah, I don't know why it need be handled any different than say
 ALTER DATABASE foo SET config_param TO value
or ALTER ROLE foo SET config_param TO value

These cases do not effect already existing processes either.

Joe


-- 
Joe Conway
credativ LLC: http://www.credativ.us
Linux, PostgreSQL, and general Open Source
Training, Service, Consulting, & 24x7 Support