On 2015-05-29 14:15:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2015-05-29 13:49:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Why can't the user stop it? > > > Because it makes a good amount of sense to have e.g. certificates not > > owned by postgres and not writeable? You don't necessarily want to > > symlink them somewhere else, because that makes moving clusters around > > harder than when they're self contained. > > Meh. Well, I'm willing to yield on the EACCES point, but I still find > the exclusion for ETXTBSY to be ugly and inappropriate.
Ok. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
