Re: modules
От | Gregory Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: modules |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87abk9h2q5.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: modules (Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca>) |
Ответы |
Re: modules
Re: modules Re: modules Re: modules |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Aidan Van Dyk" <aidan@highrise.ca> writes: > What if you didn't need super-user privileges to load "C" functions, on > the conditions that: > 1) There is no / in the obj_file filename (or some other "sanitizing" > rules) > 2) You're database owner That's an interesting idea. It has the property that no super-user is required to do any fiddling *inside* your database. That is, the ISP can just do CREATE DATABASE and then leave you have at it without having to deal with installing modules or granting any permissions inside your database. It also opens the door to .deb packagers being able to put pgfoundry modules in the same space. No other suggestion has offered any help to anything except blessed contrib modules. I would suggest a guc for the "safe" place and I would suggest it be a list of places. And I would suggest that for OS packagers they really want two locations on that list, something like: /usr/lib/postgresql/modules;/usr/local/lib/postgresql/modules That way users can compile and install their own modules into /usr/local without interfering with modules which come from OS packages. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Get trained by Bruce Momjian - ask me about EnterpriseDB'sPostgreSQL training!
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: