On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 6:35 AM, Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 2/6/17 10:54 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: >>> Yes, that's an option. And, if we add dbid to pg_stat_subscription, >>> I'm tempted to add all the pg_subscription's columns except subconninfo >>> into pg_stat_subscription. Since subconninfo may contain security-sensitive >>> information, it should be excluded. But it seems useful to expose other >>> columns. Then, if we expose all the columns except subconninfo, maybe >>> it's better to just revoke subconninfo column on pg_subscription instead of >>> all columns. Thought? >> >> I think previous practice is to provide a view such as pg_subscriptions >> that contains all the nonprivileged information. > > OK, I think that I see the point you are coming at: > pg_stat_get_subscription (or stat tables) should not be used for > psql's tab completion. So gathering all things discussed, we have: > - No tab completion for publications.
No, the tab-completions for ALTER/DROP PUBLICATION should show the local publications because those commands drop and alter the local ones. OTOH, CREATE/ALTER SUBSCRIPTOIN ... PUBLICATION should show nothing because the remote publications in the publisher side should be specified there. > - Fix the meta-commands. Yes. > - Addition of a view pg_subscriptions with all the non-sensitive data. > (- Or really extend pg_stat_subscriptions with the database ID and use > it for tab completion?) Probably I failed to get Peter's point... Anyway IMO that we can expose all the columns except the sensitive information (i.e., subconninfo field) in pg_subscription to even non-superusers. Then we can use pg_subscription for the tab-completion for ALTER/DROP SUBSCRIPTION. Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers