From: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> |
Subject: | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268) |
Date: | 2008-12-12 00:18:14 |
Message-ID: | 4941ADC6.7040205@ak.jp.nec.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Thursday 11 December 2008 18:32:50 Tom Lane wrote:
>>> How can we stick all of these in the same column at the same time?
>> Why would we want to?
>
> Because we want to use SQL-based row access control and SELinux-based row
> access control at the same time. Isn't this exactly one of the objections
> upthread? Both must be available at the same time.
Please make clear the meaning of "use".
As you said, if your concern is based on packaging/distributing issue,
I suggested an alternative proposal which allows to compile multiple
security mechanism and to choose one of them on runtime.
> We can debate the merits of having, say, SELinux plus Solaris TX at the same
> time, but if we can have two as per previous paragraph, we should design for
> several.
What platform is available for both of SELinux and Solaris TX?
I think it is exactly compile-time issue.
Thanks,
--
OSS Platform Development Division, NEC
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-12-12 00:30:16 | Re: benchmarking the query planner |
Previous Message | Nathan Boley | 2008-12-12 00:12:35 | Re: benchmarking the query planner |