On 2015-05-29 13:49:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > On 2015-05-29 13:14:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> >> As I mentioned yesterday, I'm not really on board with ignoring EACCES,
> >> except for the directories-on-Windows case. Since we're only logging
> >> the failures anyway, I think it is reasonable to log a complaint for any
> >> unwritable file in the data directory.
>
> > That sounds like a potentially nontrivial amount of repetitive log bleat
> > after every crash start? One which the user can't really stop?
>
> Why can't the user stop it?
Because it makes a good amount of sense to have e.g. certificates not
owned by postgres and not writeable? You don't necessarily want to
symlink them somewhere else, because that makes moving clusters around
harder than when they're self contained.
> I'd say it's a pretty damn-fool arrangement: for starters, it's an
> unnecessary security hazard.
I don't buy the security argument at all. You likely have
postgresql.conf in the data directoy. You can write to at least .auto,
which will definitely reside the data directory. That contains
archive_command.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
