Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP?
Date
Msg-id 19501.1363918493@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP?  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP?  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> Only one setting will be best for the whole cluster, so neither the
> user nor the DBA gains if a user sets this to a different value than
> the one that has been determined to be optimal.

> Since we wait while holding the lock it is actually harmful to
> everyone if anybody sets a stupid value and might even be considered a
> denial of service attack.

> So there is a very good reason to make this SIGHUP, not just a whim.

Hmm.  If a malicious user could hurt performance for other sessions with
a bad setting of commit_delay, then USERSET is clearly a bad idea.
But it still seems like it could be SUSET rather than SIGHUP.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Daniel Farina
Date:
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw vs data formatting GUCs (was Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables)
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]