On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 09:23:14PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > Group ownership and permissions aren't a backup-method-specific > > > requirement either, in my view. I'm happy to chat with Marco (who has > > > said he would be weighing in on this thread when he is able to) > > > regarding barman, and whomever would be appropriate for BART (perhaps > > > you could let me know..?), but if it's possible to do a backup without > > > being a superuser and with only read access to the data directory, I > > > would expect every backup soltuion to view that as a feature which they > > > want to support, as there are environments which will find it desirable, > > > at a minimum, and even some which will require it. > > > > pg_dump doesn't need to read the PGDATA directory, and I thought this > > permission was to be used by pg_dump users as well. > > No. That has been a source of confusion, though I'm not quite sure how > or why, beyond the general assumption that anything 'backup' must > include 'pg_dump' (I don't generally consider that to be the case, > myself, but it seems others do...).
I think the source of that is that many people have asked for backup-only uses, and I thought running pg_dump or pg_dumpall was one of those cases. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
