| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches (for CommitFest:Sep) |
| Date: | 2008-09-23 17:36:26 |
| Message-ID: | 200809231736.m8NHaQ309012@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> > It's too early to vote. :-)
> >
> > The second and third option have prerequisite.
> > The purpose of them is to match granularity of access controls
> > provided by SE-PostgreSQL and native PostgreSQL. However, I have
> > not seen a clear reason why these different security mechanisms
> > have to have same granuality in access controls.
>
> Have you seen a clear reason why they should NOT have the same granularity?
Agreed. If we implement SE-PostgreSQL row-level security first, we
might find that we have to replace the code once we implement SQL-level
row-level security. If we do SQL-level security first, we can then
adjust it to match what SE-PostgreSQL needs.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-09-23 17:48:00 | Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches (for CommitFest:Sep) |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-09-23 15:42:21 | Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery |