Re: insert/update/delete returning and rules

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jaime Casanova" <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Pgsql Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: insert/update/delete returning and rules
Date: 2006-09-04 13:05:20
Message-ID: E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA579014DC05E@m0143.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> With this approach, you still have to update your rules if
> you want to support RETURNING on your views --- but if you
> don't update them, you don't have a security hole. Basically
> the standard setup for an updatable view would use
> "ON INSERT DO INSTEAD INSERT INTO ... RETURNING ..."
> where today you don't write any RETURNING.

I like that approach. And if the sections allow CASE WHEN
it should be possible to cover all use cases efficiently.

Andreas

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Glaesemann 2006-09-04 13:50:58 Re: [PATCHES] possible ecpg vpath build error
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2006-09-04 12:28:56 Re: [PATCHES] Documentation fix for --with-ldap