Re: IF- statements in a rule's 'DO INSTEAD SELECT ...'- statement

From: "Bertin, Philippe" <philippe(dot)bertin(at)barco(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com>, nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: IF- statements in a rule's 'DO INSTEAD SELECT ...'- statement
Date: 2002-05-07 06:34:12
Message-ID: B9E404D03707D511BD4D00105A40C10466B590@wevmex01.barco.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Hi Alvaro, Hi Nigel,

Thanks for your reply. I indeed already tried with a plpgsql function. But
that's just my problem : if I call a function from within a view's rule,
this function is not executed anymore with the same rights as a user had on
the view. So if a user may access a view, but not the table behind, calling
a function in the DO INSTEAD- clause will not execute the function with the
proper (view) rights on the table ...

(to all) Could anyone - (developers, eventually ?) explain me why the
(security) context of a function call is not passed along when the function
gets called from within a view ? I think this feature is for sure not
superfluous, and I could consider having a look into the code to have this
changed (but I think this is a VERY big pile of source codes I never ever
looked at before, so this would take a lot of efforts ... for me)

Kind regards,

Philippe Bertin.

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jean-Paul ARGUDO 2002-05-07 07:46:18 Re: [DOCS] Migrating Oracle to PostgreSQL
Previous Message Tille, Andreas 2002-05-07 05:55:34 Allow user to create tables

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nigel J. Andrews 2002-05-07 10:33:41 Re: Schemas: status report, call for developers
Previous Message Mark kirkwood 2002-05-07 06:20:51 Unbounded (Possibly) Database Size Increase - Test Case