Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YRSQk-0003sM-Gs for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 21:26:42 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YRSQj-00020S-QS for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 21:26:41 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YRSQi-00020K-H8 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 21:26:40 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YRSQf-00053X-8l for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 21:26:39 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t1RLQVTC012546; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 16:26:31 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Stephen Frost cc: Pavel Stehule , Tomas Vondra , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: Providing catalog view to pg_hba.conf file - Patch submission In-reply-to: <20150227195529.GS29780@tamriel.snowman.net> References: <20140630070646.GY31357@toroid.org> <54C8156E.1080500@BlueTreble.com> <54C95C4B.2080901@BlueTreble.com> <54F09D68.2090700@2ndquadrant.com> <20150227165950.GP29780@tamriel.snowman.net> <20150227183236.GQ29780@tamriel.snowman.net> <20150227195529.GS29780@tamriel.snowman.net> Comments: In-reply-to Stephen Frost message dated "Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:55:29 -0500" Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 16:26:31 -0500 Message-ID: <12545.1425072391@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Stephen Frost writes: > Right, we also need a view (or function, or both) which provides what > the *active* configuration of the running postmaster is. This is > exactly what I was proposing (or what I was intending to, at least) with > pg_hba_active, so, again, I think we're in agreement here. I think that's going to be a lot harder than you realize, and it will have undesirable security implications, in that whatever you do to expose the postmaster's internal state to backends will also make it visible to other onlookers; not to mention probably adding new failure modes. There are also nontrivial semantic differences in this area between Windows and other platforms (ie in an EXEC_BACKEND build the current file contents *are* the active version). If you insist on two views you will need to explain why/how they act differently on different platforms. I think the proposed mechanism (ie read and return the current contents of the file) is just fine, and we should stop there rather than engineering this to death. We've survived twenty years with *no* feature of this sort, how is it suddenly essential that we expose postmaster internal state? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers