From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches |
Date: | 2008-09-26 02:19:52 |
Message-ID: | 5317.1222395592@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> 4. User charlie revokes alice's membership in admin.
>>
>> Now what? Alice's FK constraint is violated, according to the rules
>> KaiGai proposes. Shall REVOKE have to grovel through every table in the
>> database looking for possible violations ... and of course locking the
>> entire DB against writes while it does it? That's not gonna fly. I
>> also note that the failure would expose knowledge of the contents of BT
>> and AT to charlie, which might not be thought desirable either.
> I assume Alice now gets an error on the query that references the
> now-invisible foreign key --- that sounds reasonable to me.
You mean her data just disappears? Doesn't sound very reasonable to me.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-09-26 02:24:10 | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2008-09-26 02:10:03 | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches |