Re: AW: [HACKERS] Solution to the pg_user passwd problem !?? (c)
| От | jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: AW: [HACKERS] Solution to the pg_user passwd problem !?? (c) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | m0y5bEm-000BFRC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: AW: [HACKERS] Solution to the pg_user passwd problem !?? (c) (The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> Just curious, but why don't the copy command fall under the same
> grant/revoke restrictions in the first place? It sounds to me like we are
> backing off of the problem instead of addressing it...
>
> The problem being that it appears that 'copy' overrides/ignores
> the rewrite rules, which kind of invalidates having them, doesn't it?
> What would it take to have copy follow them as select does?
Copy does a heap scan by itself. Doesn't care about rules.
Instead copy must do a SELECT internal. Don't know if that
is really what copy should do.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: