Re: RLS makes COPY TO process child tables

Stephen Frost  writes:
>> Tom Lane  wrote:
>>> Yugo NAGATA  writes:
>>>> I think this is a bug because the current behaviour is different from
>>>> the documentation. 

>>> I agree, it shouldn't do that.

> Yeah, I agree based on what the COPY table TO docs say should be
> happening.

Yeah, the documentation is quite clear that child data is not included.

> I'm not sure if this makes good sense to back-patch.

I think we have to.  The alternative is to back-patch some very confusing
documentation changes saying "never mind all that if RLS is on".

			regards, tom lane