Re: Possible typo in create_policy.sgml

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Possible typo in create_policy.sgml
Date: 2015-01-06 19:48:41
Message-ID: CAM3SWZTPn7p9zx8CqCxxr4yXsk1zbwRa+U_M1MGQAVF7AamjCg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> Looks reasonable to me. Amit, does this read better for you? If so, I
> can handle making the change to the docs.

The docs also prominently say:

"The security-barrier qualifications will always be evaluated prior to
any user-defined functions or user-provided WHERE clauses, while the
with-check expression will be evaluated against the rows which are
going to be added to the table. By adding policies to a table, a user
can limit the rows which a given user can select, insert, update, or
delete. This capability is also known as Row Level Security or RLS."

I would prefer it if it was clearer based on the syntax description
which qual is which. The security barrier qual "expression" should
have an identifier/name in the syntax description that is more
suggestive of "security barrier qual", emphasizing its distinctness
from "check_expression". For example, I think "barrier_expression"
would be clearer.
--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2015-01-06 20:04:04 Re: parallel mode and parallel contexts
Previous Message Stefan Kaltenbrunner 2015-01-06 19:46:19 Re: Updating copyright notices to 2015 for PGDG