Markus Wanner wrote: > On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:36:41 +0100, Joachim Wieland <j...@mcknight.de> > wrote: >> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/backup-dump.html already >> states about pg_dump: "In particular, it must have read access to all >> tables that you want to back up, so in practice you almost always have >> to run it as a database superuser." so I think there is not a big loss >> here... > > Hm.. I doubt somewhat that's common practice. After all, read access to > all tables is still a *lot* less than superuser privileges. But yeah, > the documentation currently states that.
I think running as database owner gets you pretty far as far as pg_dump goes. It would be good to lift the limitation that you have to be superuser. >> But you are right: The proposed feature is a pragmatic and quick >> solution for pg_dump and similar but we might want to have a more >> general snapshot cloning procedure instead. Not having a delay for >> other activities at all and not requiring superuser privileges would >> be a big advantage over what I have proposed. > > Agreed. Yeah, a big advantage of the proposed approach is that it's pretty simple to implement as an external module, allowing you to write scripts using it for older versions too. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
