Re: why not using a mountpoint as PGDATA? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Peter J. Holzer
Subject Re: why not using a mountpoint as PGDATA?
Date
Msg-id 20190227164912.ty6rx2t7gjvn2lo3@hjp.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: why not using a mountpoint as PGDATA?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: why not using a mountpoint as PGDATA?  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
List pgsql-general
On 2019-02-27 10:42:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Luca Ferrari <fluca1978@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 12:33 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> You can see most obvious reasons at
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1247477
[...]
> The case that I can recall most clearly was actually in the other
> direction: during system bootup, some NFS volume that was being abused
> this way (mount point == data dir) was slow to mount.  Compounding the
> problem, postgres was being started through some init script that would
> helpfully run initdb if it saw the specified data directory was empty.
> So, rather than failing like a properly paranoid DBA would wish, it
> ran initdb and then started the postmaster.

Ouch.

I wonder though why that directory was writable by the postgres user.
But maybe the helpful start script chown'ed it to fix the "wrong"
permissions.

        hp

--
   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | we build much bigger, better disasters now
|_|_) |                    | because we have much more sophisticated
| |   | hjp@hjp.at         | management tools.
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Ross Anderson <https://www.edge.org/>

Attachment

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Michael Lewis
Date:
Subject: Re: idle_in_transaction_session_timeout for a set of SQL statements
Next
From: Jeremy Finzel
Date:
Subject: Re: idle_in_transaction_session_timeout for a set of SQL statements