| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: row_security GUC, BYPASSRLS |
| Date: | 2015-09-21 02:19:04 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ+giFihUaatPL9wjHy_XBhjc-_95GVkH2B5AstnnGRVA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> * Joe Conway (mail(at)joeconway(dot)com) wrote:
>> On 09/18/2015 01:07 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > Great. Robert, does that work for you, too? If so, this sub-thread is
>> > looking at three patches:
>> >
>> > 1. remove row_security=force
>> > 2. remove SECURITY_ROW_LEVEL_DISABLED; make ri_triggers.c subject to policies
>> > 3. add DDL-controlled, per-table policy forcing
>> >
>> > They ought to land in that order. PostgreSQL 9.5 would need at least (1) and
>> > (2); would RLS experts find it beneficial for me to take care of those?
>>
>> That would be awesome, but I would say that if we do #1 & 2 for 9.5, we
>> also need #3.
>
> Agreed on all of the above.
Well, then, we should get cracking. beta1 is coming soon, and it
would be best if this were done before then.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-09-21 02:21:16 | Re: row_security GUC, BYPASSRLS |
| Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2015-09-21 02:03:43 | Limit GIST_MAX_SPLIT_PAGES to XLR_MAX_BLOCK_ID |