Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
>> The way MyCancelKey is checked now is backwards, in my mind.  It seems
>> like it would be better checked by the receiving PID (one can use a
>> check/recheck also, if so inclined).  Is there a large caveat to that?
>
> You mean, other than the fact that kill(2) can't transmit such a key?

I was planning on using an out-of-line mechanism. Bad idea?

> But actually I don't see what you hope to gain from such a change,
> even if it can be made to work.  Anyone who can do kill(SIGINT) can
> do kill(SIGKILL), say --- so you have to be able to trust the signal
> sender.  What's the point of not trusting it to verify the client
> identity?

No longer true with pg_cancel_backend not-by-superuser, no? Now there
are new people who can do kill(SIGINT) (modulus the already existing
cancel requests).

--
fdr