Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: How to get SE-PostgreSQL acceptable

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joshua Brindle <method(at)manicmethod(dot)com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: How to get SE-PostgreSQL acceptable
Date: 2009-01-29 10:58:13
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:

> I'm wondering if this problem could be solved with a sort of
> mark-and-sweep garbage collection: 
> Then you can write something which goes through and sets all the rows
> to false and then visits every row of every table in the database and
> forces OID lookups on the security ID of each.  When you get done, any
> rows that still say false are unreferenced and can be killed.

This sounds awfully similar to the bitmap index vacuum problem. I wonder if
security labels could be implemented as some kind of funky special index.

Just thinking out loud. I don't have a well-formed idea based on this.

  Gregory Stark
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2009-01-29 11:08:06
Subject: Re: Commitfest infrastructure
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2009-01-29 10:30:02
Subject: Re: mingw check hung

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group