Re: tsearch_core patch: permissions and security issues

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tsearch_core patch: permissions and security issues
Date: 2007-06-15 15:39:36
Message-ID: 1181921976.17734.14.camel@silverbirch.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 10:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Although I'm happy to see tsearch finally hit the big time, I'm a bit
> > disappointed to see so many new datatype-specific SQL commands created.
>
> Per subsequent discussion we are down to just one new set of commands,
> CREATE/ALTER/DROP TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION, so it's not as big a
> footprint as it was to start with.

Thats a lot better, thanks. I'm sure that will work better in PgAdmin
and many other places too.

> I have been thinking that it would be smart to try to use the generic
> "definition list" syntax, like CREATE OPERATOR and CREATE AGGREGATE.
> But the motivation for that is just to avoid defining more keywords
> (which has an overall impact on parser size and performance). It's
> not really going to do anything for us in terms of having an
> implementation that can be shared with anything else.

It's OK; ALTER RFID TAG NOMENCLATURE has a nice ring to it. :-)

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message nhrcommu 2007-06-15 15:49:08 Re: The Business Case for PostgreSQL
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-06-15 15:39:20 Re: How does the tsearch configuration get selected?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2007-06-15 15:57:05 Re: How does the tsearch configuration get selected?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-06-15 15:39:20 Re: How does the tsearch configuration get selected?