On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Daniel Farina <dan...@heroku.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think the more important question is a policy question: do we want >> it to work like this? It seems like a policy question that ought to >> be left to the DBA, but we have no policy management framework for >> DBAs to configure what they do or do not wish to allow. Still, if >> we've decided it's OK to allow cancelling, I don't see any real reason >> why this should be treated differently. > > Is there a hypothetical DBA that doesn't want a mere-mortal user to be > able to signal one of their own backends to do "cancel query, rollback > the transaction, then close the socket"? If so, why?
Well, I guess if you have different people sharing the same user-ID, you probably wouldn't want that. But maybe that's not an important case. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
