Re: pg_basebackup ignores the existing data directory permissions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: pg_basebackup ignores the existing data directory permissions
Date
Msg-id CABUevEx4NyyrihUJs9ega0KFSzy9xUHovgKsJ+gRfasu5hBxtg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_basebackup ignores the existing data directory permissions  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: pg_basebackup ignores the existing data directory permissions  (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 9:10 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 06:34:07PM +1100, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> we have an application that is used to create the data directory with

Well, initdb would do that happily, so there is no actual any need to
do that to begin with.  Anyway..

> owner access (0700), but with initdb group permissions option, it
> automatically
> converts to (0750) by the initdb. But pg_basebackup doesn't change it when
> it tries to do a backup from a group access server.

So that's basically the opposite of the case I was thinking about,
where you create a path for a base backup with permissions strictly
higher than 700, say 755, and the base backup path does not have
enough restrictions.  And in your case the permissions are too
restrictive because of the application creating the folder itself but
they should be relaxed if group access is enabled.  Actually, that's
something that we may want to do consistently across all branches.  If
an application calls pg_basebackup after creating a path, they most
likely change the permissions anyway to allow the postmaster to
start.

I think it could be argued that neither initdb *or* pg_basebackup should change the permissions on an existing directory, because the admin may have done that intentionally. But when they do create the directory, they should follow the same patterns.
 
--

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: useless argument of ATAddForeignKeyConstraint
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL insert delay settings