On 08/05/2013 09:53 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>
>> What Josh seems to be concerned with in this thread is the question of
>> whether we should support an installation *policy decision* not to allow
>> ALTER SYSTEM SET. Not because a particular set of parameters is broken,
>> but just because somebody is afraid the DBA might break things. TBH
>> I'm not sure I buy that, at least not as long as ALTER SYSTEM is a
>> superuser feature. There is nothing in Postgres that denies permissions
>> to superusers, and this doesn't seem like a very good place to start.
>
> Someone made an argument about this on IRC: GUI tool users are going to
> want to use ALTER SYSTEM through point-and-click, and if all we offer is
> superuser-level access to the feature, we're going to end up with a lot
> of people running with superuser privileges just so that they are able
> to tweak inconsequential settings. This seems dangerous.
indeed it is
>
> The other issue is that currently you can only edit a server's config if
> you are logged in to it. If we permit SQL-level access to that, and
> somebody who doesn't have access to edit the files blocks themselves
> out, there is no way for them to get a working system *at all*.
thinking more about that - is there _ANY_ prerequisite of an application
that can be completely reconfigured over a remote access protocol and
solved the reliability and security challenges of that to a reasonable
degree?
Stefan
