Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions
От | Gurjeet Singh |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTinXRPHv8yF6VVv9g=jpeCe+vCD4qCGZGLS5K8YG@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
I've applied this version (with some minor typo-fixes).> Ok, here's an updated patch that does both these and includes
> documentation and regression test changes. With that, I think we're
> good to go.
Do you think we could have worded these a bit better
<entry>Prepare for performing on-line backup (restricted to superusers or replication roles)</entry>
to say 'restricted to superusers _and_ replication roles'.
Saying 'restricted to superusers _or_ replication roles' may mean that at any time we allow one or the other, but not both (reader might assume that decision is based on some other GUC).
Using 'and' would mean that we allow it for both of those roles.
Any specific reason NOREPLICATION_P and REPLICATION_P use the _P suffix? AIUI, that suffix is used in gram.y to tag a token to mean it belongs to Parser, and to avoid conflict with the same token elsewhere; NULL_P is a good example.
In pg_authid.h, 8 spaces used between 'bool' and 'rolreplication', instead tabs should have been used as the surrounding code.
Regards,
--
gurjeet.singh
@ EnterpriseDB - The Enterprise Postgres Company
http://www.EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | yahoo }.com
Twitter/Skype: singh_gurjeet
Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: