Re: postgres uptime - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Marc G. Fournier
Subject Re: postgres uptime
Date
Msg-id 20040820012613.D30511@ganymede.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: postgres uptime  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
>> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Gavin Sherry wrote:
>>> However, I'm not sure why an uptime is all that useful?
>
>> Bragging rights? :)
>
> The folks who have a legitimate interest in that number can surely find
> it out from "ps".  What I'm having a hard time with here is the value of
> allowing the number to be found out remotely.  Most sites disabled
> remote "ps" decades ago, for good and sufficient reason.

There used to be a 'remote ps'?  That I didn't know ...

But, back to the question at hand ... if we're worried about 'regular 
users' having access to it (which, I'm still a bit confused as to why, but 
that's in my other email) ... why not make it a 'superuser only' function? 
In fact, from that perspective, there would be use, since it would allow 
the admin to check remotely for situations where the server is/has crashed 
... something that could also be easily (I'd imagine) to admin software 
like pgadmin, where if user has superuser access, a 'time since last 
reboot' could be included as part of the status screen ...



----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: tablespace and sequences?
Next
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: tablespace and sequences?