[HACKERS] pg_id and pg_encoding
Is there any reason to keep separate pg_id and pg_encoding programs, or should they be merged into a C version of initdb? AFAICS initdb is the only thing that uses them. We'll also need to decide the Windows equivalent of the 'don't run as root' rule - or even if we want to enforce it at all, given that it appears to be very common practice on Windows to run all services as a user with Administrator privileges. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] pg_id and pg_encoding
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Is there any reason to keep separate pg_id and pg_encoding programs, or should they be merged into a C version of initdb? AFAICS initdb is the only thing that uses them. Yes, I assume they would go away with a C version. We'll also need to decide the Windows equivalent of the 'don't run as root' rule - or even if we want to enforce it at all, given that it appears to be very common practice on Windows to run all services as a user with Administrator privileges. I assume we will relax that for Win32. I don't think non-Administrators have the same isolation on Win32 as non-root users have on Unix. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [HACKERS] pg_id and pg_encoding
Bruce Momjian wrote: We'll also need to decide the Windows equivalent of the 'don't run as root' rule - or even if we want to enforce it at all, given that it appears to be very common practice on Windows to run all services as a user with Administrator privileges. I assume we will relax that for Win32. I don't think non-Administrators have the same isolation on Win32 as non-root users have on Unix. While it's best practice for *ix to work as non-root, many windows users will be administrator-equivalent. The Local System account commonly used to run services is even more privileged than the local admin. So the restriction to non-admins won't make too much sense. Regards, Andreas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] pg_id and pg_encoding
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: We'll also need to decide the Windows equivalent of the 'don't run as root' rule - or even if we want to enforce it at all, given that it appears to be very common practice on Windows to run all services as a user with Administrator privileges. I assume we will relax that for Win32. I don't think non-Administrators have the same isolation on Win32 as non-root users have on Unix. While it's best practice for *ix to work as non-root, many windows users will be administrator-equivalent. The Local System account commonly used to run services is even more privileged than the local admin. So the restriction to non-admins won't make too much sense. Work as non-root is a good practice for windows user too, I'll not bet for the future that on windows all users will be super user; you can choose to start a service like a non super user too, I'd like to mantain the same policy on windows too. Regards Gaetano Mendola ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] pg_id and pg_encoding
Gaetano Mendola wrote: Work as non-root is a good practice for windows user too, I'll not bet for the future that on windows all users will be super user; you can choose to start a service like a non super user too, I'd like to mantain the same policy on windows too. We're talking about running services, and many admins probably run their services with an admin group member account. User accounts *can* selectively be given the needed privileges to run a service, but it's quite tricky and documentation isn't too good about this. Regards, Andreas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] pg_id and pg_encoding
On Sun, 2003-09-07 at 16:46, Bruce Momjian wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: Is there any reason to keep separate pg_id and pg_encoding programs, or should they be merged into a C version of initdb? AFAICS initdb is the only thing that uses them. Yes, I assume they would go away with a C version. I use both of them for the Debian packaging, to try to ensure that upgrading goes seamlessly. -- Oliver Elphick[EMAIL PROTECTED] Isle of Wight, UK http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Romans 10:13 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
