2011/12/6 Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net>: > On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 23:32, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: >>> On Sun, Oct 02, 2011 at 06:55:51AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >>>> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira >>>> <eu...@timbira.com> wrote: >>>>> I see. What about passing this decision to DBA? I mean a GUC >>>>> can_cancel_session = user, dbowner (default is '' -- only superuser). You >>>>> can select one or both options. This GUC can only be changed by superuser. >> >>>> Or how about making it a grantable database-level privilege? >> >>> I think either is overkill. You can implement any policy by interposing a >>> SECURITY DEFINER wrapper around pg_cancel_backend(). >> >> I'm with Noah on this. If allowing same-user cancels is enough to solve >> 95% or 99% of the real-world use cases, let's just do that. There's no >> very good reason to suppose that a GUC or some more ad-hoc privileges >> will solve a large enough fraction of the rest of the cases to be worth >> their maintenance effort. In particular, I think both of the above >> proposals assume way too much about the DBA's specific administrative >> requirements. > > +1. > > Torello, are you up for updating your patch to do this, for now? If > not, I'll be happy to create an updated patch that does just this, but > since you got started on it... >
Sorry for the long delay. I will try to adjust the patch and submit for the next Commit Fest if this is ok for you. > -- > Magnus Hagander > Me: http://www.hagander.net/ > Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
