Re: leaky views, yet again

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "bricklen" <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: leaky views, yet again
Date: 2010-10-05 20:59:18
Message-ID: 4CAB4B560200002500036579@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
>> Right now this is managed by query classes in our Java
>> applications, but as we're moving to a variety of new and
>> different technologies it's getting harder for the DBAs to ensure
>> that nothing is leaking to inappropriate recipients. :-( I
>> think we're going to need to move more of the enforcement to
>> database views and/or security restrictions based on database
>> roles.
>
> Does Veil cover some of those needs?
> http://veil.projects.postgresql.org/curdocs/index.html
> I've never used it, but from what I recall hearing about it, it
> did something similar (I thought).

Possibly. The general tone of references to it, as well as the fact
that it's still classified as being in beta testing, with a release
number less than one, have put me off from looking at it closely.
Is anyone using it in a situation where they have three thousand
directly connected users? Or on a database backing a web site with
five million hits a day? On a schema with over 300 tables
(normalized, no partitioning)? If so, I'd be interested in hearing
about it.

-Kevin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-10-05 21:00:20 Re: querying the version of libpq
Previous Message Bernd Helmle 2010-10-05 20:57:44 Re: Re: starting to review the Extend NOT NULL representation to pg_constraint patch