
Is there any reason to keep separate pg_id and pg_encoding programs, or 
should they be merged into a C version of initdb? AFAICS initdb is the 
only thing that uses them.

We'll also need to decide the Windows equivalent of the 'don't run as 
root' rule - or even if we want to enforce it at all, given that it 
appears to be very common practice on Windows to run all services as a 
user with Administrator privileges.

cheers

andrew


Sun, 07 Sep 2003 09:21:58 -0400
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
pg_id and pg_encoding
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> Is there any reason to keep separate pg_id and pg_encoding programs, or 
> should they be merged into a C version of initdb? AFAICS initdb is the 
> only thing that uses them.

Yes, I assume they would go away with a C version.

> We'll also need to decide the Windows equivalent of the 'don't run as 
> root' rule - or even if we want to enforce it at all, given that it 
> appears to be very common practice on Windows to run all services as a 
> user with Administrator privileges.

I assume we will relax that for Win32.  I don't think non-Administrators
have the same isolation on Win32 as non-root users have on Unix.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Sun, 7 Sep 2003 11:46:20 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: pg_id and pg_encoding
Bruce Momjian wrote:

>>We'll also need to decide the Windows equivalent of the 'don't run as 
>>root' rule - or even if we want to enforce it at all, given that it 
>>appears to be very common practice on Windows to run all services as a 
>>user with Administrator privileges.
>>    
>>
>
>I assume we will relax that for Win32.  I don't think non-Administrators
>have the same isolation on Win32 as non-root users have on Unix.
>  
>
While it's best practice for *ix to work as non-root, many windows users 
will be administrator-equivalent. The "Local System account" commonly 
used to run services is even more privileged than the local admin. So 
the restriction to non-admins won't make too much sense.

Regards,
Andreas




Sun, 07 Sep 2003 18:22:22 +0200
Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>
Re: pg_id and pg_encoding
"Andreas Pflug" <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> >>We'll also need to decide the Windows equivalent of the 'don't run as 
> >>root' rule - or even if we want to enforce it at all, given that it 
> >>appears to be very common practice on Windows to run all services as a 
> >>user with Administrator privileges.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I assume we will relax that for Win32.  I don't think non-Administrators
> >have the same isolation on Win32 as non-root users have on Unix.
> >  
> >
> While it's best practice for *ix to work as non-root, many windows users 
> will be administrator-equivalent. The "Local System account" commonly 
> used to run services is even more privileged than the local admin. So 
> the restriction to non-admins won't make too much sense.

Work as non-root is a good practice for windows user too, I'll not bet
for the future that on windows all users will be "super user"; 
you can choose to start a service like a non super user too, I'd like to 
mantain the same policy on windows too.


Regards
Gaetano Mendola


Sun, 7 Sep 2003 19:30:52 +0200
"Gaetano Mendola" <mendola@bigfoot.com>
Re: pg_id and pg_encoding
Gaetano Mendola wrote:

>
>
>Work as non-root is a good practice for windows user too, I'll not bet
>for the future that on windows all users will be "super user"; 
>you can choose to start a service like a non super user too, I'd like to 
>mantain the same policy on windows too.
>
>  
>
We're talking about running services, and many admins probably run their 
services with an admin group member account. User accounts *can* 
selectively be given the needed privileges to run a service, but it's 
quite tricky and documentation isn't too good about this.

Regards,
Andreas



Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:16:05 +0200
Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>
Re: pg_id and pg_encoding
On Sun, 2003-09-07 at 16:46, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > 
> > Is there any reason to keep separate pg_id and pg_encoding programs, or 
> > should they be merged into a C version of initdb? AFAICS initdb is the 
> > only thing that uses them.
> 
> Yes, I assume they would go away with a C version.

I use both of them for the Debian packaging, to try to ensure that
upgrading goes seamlessly.

-- 
Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight, UK                             http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839  932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
                 ========================================
     "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord 
      shall be saved."         Romans 10:13 


Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:56:11 +0100
Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
Re: pg_id and pg_encoding