RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
Subject RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
Date
Msg-id OSCPR01MB14966EC12277712131EB8EDF1F5EEA@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
List pgsql-hackers
Dear Michael,

> However, could there be more to consider here?  Contrary to DROP
> DATABASE, where we require the drop to be done by the owner of the
> database (or a superuser), CREATE DATABASE has less requirements: it
> is fine for a role to create a database if they have the CREATEDB
> rights. If we allow bgworkers to be cancelled when the database they
> are connected to is used as a source, that may be disruptive, so we
> had better document precisely the behavior of the flag and what users
> should expect from it when set.

Actually, if the database is not marked as the template one, the user must be
owner of the source or superuser. Not sure there is a real case that template
database has dedicated workers, but anyway I do agree to note down this behavior.
It is surprising that creating other databases lead the process terminations.

Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Chao Li
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_createsubscriber --dry-run logging concerns
Next
From: Peter Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical Replication of sequences