On 09/30/2017 10:32 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2017-09-30 22:28:39 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>>> But even after fixing that, there unfortunately is:
>>>>
>>>> static void
>>>> set_sig(char *signame)
>>>> {
>>>> …
>>>> #if 0
>>>> /* probably should NOT provide SIGKILL */
>>>> else if (strcmp(signame, "KILL") == 0)
>>>> sig = SIGKILL;
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>> I'm unclear on what that provision is achieving? If you can kill with
>>>> pg_ctl you can do other nasty stuff too (like just use kill instead of
>>>> pg_ctl)?
>>
>> I put it in when we rewrote pg_ctl in C many years ago, possibly out of
>> a superabundance of caution. I agree it's worth revisiting. I think the
>> idea was that there's a difference between an ordinary footgun and an
>> officially sanctioned footgun :-)
> Heh. I'm inclined to take it out. We could add a --use-the-force-luke
> type parameter, but it doesn't seem worth it.
>
>
>
I agree, but I think we need this discussed on -hackers. Does anyone
have an objection to allowing "pg_ctl kill KILL somepid"? As Andres
points out, in most places you can just call kill from the command line
anyway, so disallowing it is not really a security feature. Having it
would let us have portable crash restart tests.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
