Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9834.1229020345@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268) (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > On Thursday 11 December 2008 18:32:50 Tom Lane wrote: >>> How can we stick all of these in the same column at the same time? >> >> Why would we want to? > Because we want to use SQL-based row access control and SELinux-based row > access control at the same time. Isn't this exactly one of the objections > upthread? Both must be available at the same time. Well, the objection I was raising is that they should control the same thing. Otherwise we are simply inventing an invasive, high-cost, nonstandard(*) feature that we have had zero field demand for. regards, tom lane (*) Worse than nonstandard: it actively breaks semantics demanded by the standard. If I had my druthers we would flat out reject row-level security filtering of any kind. I don't want us to expend a lot of effort implementing multiple kinds.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: