Re: Possibility to disable `ALTER SYSTEM`
От | Jelte Fennema-Nio |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Possibility to disable `ALTER SYSTEM` |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAGECzQQgKOybQyio4Uij8zmzK9mes0_aU1ZRoMxBf8YbH-QFwA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Possibility to disable `ALTER SYSTEM` (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Possibility to disable `ALTER SYSTEM`
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 at 16:10, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > Uh, the above is clearly wrong. I think you mean "off" on the second line. > > Woops. When the name changed from externally_managed_configuration to > allow_alter_system, the sense of it was reversed, and I guess Jelte > missed flipping the documentation references around. Yeah, that's definitely what happened. I did change a few, but I indeed missed a few others (or maybe flipped some twice by accident, or hadn't been flipped before when it reversed previously). > > Why "remotely"? > > This wording was suggested upthread. I think the point here is that if > the superuser is logging in from the local machine, it's obvious that > they can do whatever they want. The point is to emphasize that a > superuser without a local login can, too. Changed this from "remotely using other means" to "using other SQL commands". > > "its"? > > Yeah, that seems like an extra word. Changed this to "the configuration of PostgreSQL" > > > + some outside mechanism. In such environments, using <command>ALTER > > > + SYSTEM</command> to make configuration changes might appear to work, > > > + but then may be discarded at some point in the future when that outside > > > > "might" > > This does not seem like a mistake to me. I'm not sure why you think it is. I also think the original sentence was correct, but I don't think it read very naturally. Changed it now in hopes to improve that. > > > + mechanism updates the configuration. Setting this parameter to > > > + <literal>on</literal> can help to avoid such mistakes. > > > + </para> > > > > "off" > > This is another case that needs to be fixed now that the sense of the > GUC is reversed. (We'd better make sure the code has the test the > right way around, too.) Fixed this one too, and the code is the right way around.
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: