Re: Improving RLS planning

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Improving RLS planning
Date: 2017-01-17 17:47:08
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> >> Here's an updated version of the RLS planning patch that gets rid of
> >> the incorrect interaction with Query.hasRowSecurity and adjusts
> >> terminology as agreed.
> > I've spent a fair bit of time going over this change to understand it,
> > how it works, and how it changes the way RLS and securiy barrier views
> > work.
> Thanks for the review. Attached is an updated patch that I believe
> addresses all of the review comments so far. The code is unchanged from
> v2, but I improved the README, some comments, and the regression tests.

I've reviewed your updates and they answer all of my comments and I
appreciate the EC regression tests you added.

I also agree with Dean's down-thread suggested regression test change.



In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-01-17 17:52:20 Re: Implement targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM() (was Changed SRF in targetlist handling)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-01-17 17:26:58 Re: Packages: Again