From: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not? |
Date: | 2006-04-30 15:52:13 |
Message-ID: | 20060430155213.GA6784@wolff.to |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 12:28:50 +0200,
>
> Since a real stumbling block with the macro approach seems to be the
> granting of permissions maybe we should work on that problem. For
> example, making SERIAL be a macro that expands to:
>
> id integer default nextval(sequence) SECURITY DEFINER,
>
> Which would mean that the default expression would be executed as the
> creator of the table, thus obviating the need to grant explicit
> permission to the sequence.
I suggested a long time ago that default expressions should always be
executed as the owner of the table. This got shot down, but I don't remember
if it was because people thought the idea was bad in itself or if it was
the work involved (which I wasn't in a position to do).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2006-04-30 16:14:53 | Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not? |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2006-04-30 13:54:48 | Re: Constraint Exclusion + Joins? |