Re: Triggers with DO functionality
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Triggers with DO functionality |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24412.1330111656@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Triggers with DO functionality (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Triggers with DO functionality
Re: Triggers with DO functionality |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > On fre, 2012-02-17 at 16:46 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> But perhaps SECURITY DEFINER is a common enough need to justify >> including in this shorthand form. > According to the SQL standard, trigger actions run in security definer > mode. I would hope that we could go with that by default for inline > trigger actions, because it's the thing that makes sense for triggers > most of the time anyway, I think. Uh, I'm not sure that we are talking about the same thing. By default, a trigger function runs as the table owner, ie it's implicitly SEC DEF to the table owner. Are you saying the spec expects something different from that? (Thinks some more...) Actually, the point of SECURITY DEFINER on a trigger function is to run as somebody other than the table owner, to wit the function owner. And with an anonymous function there couldn't be any other owner. So I guess there is no need for this clause in this context. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: