From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches (for CommitFest:Sep) |
Date: | 2008-09-24 03:41:06 |
Message-ID: | 200809240341.m8O3f6Y15029@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> > I think the answer is yes, because (as others have said) if we ever want
> > to have SQL-level per-row permissions, then we can implement them with
> > no change to the patch currently in discussion.
>
> If that's true, it weighs somewhat in favor of accepting this patch,
> but how sure are we that it's really the case? If you only have one
> implementation sitting on top of your abstraction layer, it's hard to
> know whether you've implemented a general framework for doing X or
> merely an interface that happens to suit the particular flavor of X
> that you want to do today.
Yes, that is my point, and SE-Linux is just Linux, meaning it is
OS-specific, making it even less generally useful.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | chetan N | 2008-09-24 03:53:05 | stored procedure |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-09-24 03:20:01 | Re: PostgreSQL future ideas |