Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions
Date
Msg-id 5006.1090687365@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions
Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions
Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions
List pgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Agreed it should be relative to the log directory, which may or not be
> under PGDATA, and don't let them go up above it.  Is there any downside
> to allowing absolute reads as well because COPY can already read
> absolute files.

Perhaps not from a security point of view, but I think it would be
rather bizarre for a general-purpose pg_read_file() function to default
to reading from the log directory.  From the point of view of having
a consistent API, it'd be better to call the functions something like
pg_read_logdirectory() and pg_read_logfile() and restrict them to the
log directory.  If we later decide we want to add a general
pg_read_file() operation, we won't have to contort its operation to
preserve compatibility with the log-fetching case.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions