Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-WzkGw6YGPTvQeJRRaeNh=LEQxeqAWsX4vdynca8bc+oquQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table
Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > Also, ISTM that the code within ENRMetadataGetTupDesc() probably > requires more explanation, resource management wise. Also, it's not clear why it should be okay that the new type of ephemeral RTEs introduced don't have permissions checks. There are currently cases where the user cannot see data that they inserted themselves (e.g., through RETURNING), on the theory that a before row trigger might have modified the final contents of the tuple in a way that the original inserter isn't supposed to know details about. As the INSERT docs say, "Use of the RETURNING clause requires SELECT privilege on all columns mentioned in RETURNING". Similarly, the excluded.* pseudo-relation requires select privilege (on the corresponding target relation columns) in order to be usable by ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: