Re: 9.2RC1 wraps this Thursday ... - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: 9.2RC1 wraps this Thursday ...
Date
Msg-id 3939.1345568469@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 9.2RC1 wraps this Thursday ...  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>)
Responses Re: 9.2RC1 wraps this Thursday ...
Re: 9.2RC1 wraps this Thursday ...
List pgsql-hackers
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com> writes:
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
>> * pg_ctl crashes on Win32 when neither PGDATA nor -D specified

>> I'm not sure that this qualifies as a release blocker either --- isn't
>> it a plain-vanilla pre-existing bug?

> This is to handle one part of the overall problem. Below is text from
> previous mail discussion due to which new handling is introduced:
> "
>> I note that "postgres -C data_directory" will refuse to run on the
>> command line because I've got admin privileges in Windows, and that
>> pg_ctl normally starts postgres.exe using CreateRestrictedProcess.
>> But it does not do so for the popen call in adjust_data_dir.

Ah, okay, so that is a new bug in 9.2.  I've adjusted the description
on the open-items page to reflect what still needs to be fixed.

>> isn't there a way to actually test if we're in a restricted process?

> Do you mean to say that it should check if pg_ctl runs as an administrative
> user then do the re-fork in restricted mode. 

Something like that.  The proposed patch depends on there not being a
conflicting environment variable, which seems rather fragile to me.
Can't we test the same condition that postgres.exe itself would test?
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.2RC1 wraps this Thursday ...
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Slow tab completion w/ lots of tables