Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:58:08 -0400
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: michael@paquier.xyz, andres@anarazel.de, jkatz@postgresql.org,
	davecramer@postgres.rocks, masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com,
	masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com, sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pg@bowt.ie
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()
 at walsender.c:2762
Message-ID: <20200624145808.GA18120@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20200624.115638.1224023045303890562.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On 2020-Jun-24, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:

> In logical replication, a replication role is intended to be
> accessible only to the GRANTed databases.  On the other hand the same
> role can create a dead copy of the whole cluster, including
> non-granted databases.

In other words -- essentially, if you grant replication access to a role
only to a specific database, they can steal the whole cluster.

I don't see what's so great about that, but apparently people like it.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services