Re: API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+Tgmoa30KKuurSsQerbqG1u5YHcaqJf01RL33zro+rpex4Lwg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner? ("Brightwell, Adam" <adam.brightwell@crunchydatasolutions.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Brightwell, Adam <adam.brightwell@crunchydatasolutions.com> wrote: > I absolutely appreciate all of the feedback that has been provided. It has > been educational. To your point above, I started putting together a wiki > page, as Stephen has spoken to, that is meant to capture these concerns and > considerations as well as to capture ideas around solutions. > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Row_Security_Considerations > > This page is obviously not complete, but I think it is a good start. > Hopefully this document will help to continue the conversation and assist in > addressing all the concerns that have been brought to the table. As well, I > hope that this document serves to demonstrate our intent and that we *are* > taking these concerns seriously. I assure you that as one of the > individuals who is working towards the acceptance of this feature/patch, I > am very much concerned about meeting the expected standards of quality and > security. Cool, thanks for weighing in. I think that page is a good start. An item that I think should be added there is the potential overlap between security_barrier views and row-level security. How can we reuse code (and SQL syntax?) for existing features like WITH CHECK OPTION instead of writing new code (and inventing new syntax) for very similar concepts? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: