> The standard approach for C-coded functions is to mark them
> 'proisstrict' in pg_proc, and then not waste any code checking for NULL;
> the function manager takes care of it for you.  The only reason not to
> do it that way is if you actually want to return non-NULL for (some
> cases with) NULL inputs.  Offhand this looks like a strict function to
> me...
>

Thanks for the feedback! To summarize the recommended changes:

- put function into backend/utils/adt/acl.c.
- remove PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1
- mark 'proisstrict' in pg_proc
- rename to has_table_privilege()
- overload the function name for 6 versions (OIDs 1920 - 1925):
    -> has_table_privilege(text username, text relname, text priv)
    -> has_table_privilege(oid usesysid, text relname, text priv)
    -> has_table_privilege(oid usesysid, oid reloid, text priv)
    -> has_table_privilege(text username, oid reloid, text priv)
    -> has_table_privilege(text relname, text priv)    /* assumes
current_user */
    -> has_table_privilege(oid reloid, text priv)    /* assumes current_user
*/

New patch forthcoming . . .

-- Joe

In response to

• Re: Fw: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole - Solution Proposal at 2001-06-01 17:18:07 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: Fw: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole - Solution Proposal at 2001-06-02 22:14:41 from Joe Conway

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Jan Wieck	Date: 2001-06-01 23:17:37
	Subject: Sorry
Previous:	From: Ryan Mahoney	Date: 2001-06-01 21:08:07
	Subject: Re: Re: Interesting Atricle

pgsql-patches by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2001-06-01 22:35:16
	Subject: Re: show all;
Previous:	From: Marko Kreen	Date: 2001-06-01 22:17:02
	Subject: Re: show all;