| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Kohei Kaigai <Kohei(dot)Kaigai(at)emea(dot)nec(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem |
| Date: | 2011-09-26 00:50:42 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZOmyRM0hfu5EyU4n1nZQrPuAipAFxxKLdFJgeUz+4sOg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> wrote:
>> I'm a bit nervous about storing security_barrier in the RTE. What
>> happens to stored rules if the security_barrier option gets change
>> later?
>>
> The rte->security_barrier is evaluated when a query referencing security
> views get expanded. So, rte->security_barrier is not stored to catalog.
I think it is. If you create a view that involves an RTE, the node
tree is going to get stored in pg_rewrite.ev_action. And it's going
to include the security_barrier attribute, because you added outfuncs
support for it...
No?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-09-26 01:07:14 | contrib/sepgsql regression tests are a no-go |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-09-26 00:46:22 | Re: index-only scans |