From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: michael@paquier.xyz
Cc: kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Regression test PANICs with master-standby setup on same machine
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:02:03 -0400
Message-ID: <16630.1556125323@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190424162449.3jrna4iqjm3nzmz2@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20190423170503.uw5jxrujqlozg23l@alap3.anarazel.de>
<20190424.131845.116224815.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<20190424.132304.40676137.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<20190424.170228.203880527.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<10967.1556115189@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190424162449.3jrna4iqjm3nzmz2@alap3.anarazel.de>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-04-24 10:13:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I can't say that I like 0001 at all. It adds a bunch of complication and
>> new failure modes (e.g., having to panic on chdir failure) in order to do
>> what exactly? I've not been following the thread closely, but the
>> original problem is surely just a dont-do-that misconfiguration. I also
>> suspect that this is assuming way too much about the semantics of getcwd
>> --- some filesystem configurations may have funny situations like multiple
>> paths to the same place.
> I'm not at all defending the conrete patch. But I think allowing
> relative paths to tablespaces would solve a whole lot of practical
> problems, while not meaningfully increasing failure modes.
I'm not against allowing relative tablespace paths. But I did not like
the chdir and getcwd-semantics hazards --- why do we have to buy into
all that to allow relative paths?
I think it would likely be sufficient to state plainly in the docs
that a relative path had better point outside $PGDATA, and maybe
have some *simple* tests on the canonicalized form of the path to
prevent obvious mistakes. Going further than that is likely to add
more problems than it removes.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp, michael@paquier.xyz, kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Regression test PANICs with master-standby setup on same machine
In-Reply-To: <16630.1556125323@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox