Re: Connection limit and Superuser

[Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>]

Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> > As a protection against malice, yes. I think Rod was more interested 
> > in some protection against stupidity.
> >
> > Maybe the real answer is that Slony should connect as a non-superuser 
> > and call security definer functions for the privileged things it 
> > needs to do.
>
>
> Wouldn't that break Slony's ability to connect to older postgresql 
> versions and replicate?

I don't know anything of Slony's internals, but I don't see why older 
versions should matter - Postgres has had security definer functions for 
every release that Slony supports. Maybe I'm missing something ...

cheers

andrew