| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>, Mark Volpe <volpe(dot)mark(at)epa(dot)gov>, "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: AW: AW: AW: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions |
| Date: | 2001-06-25 16:14:59 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.30.0106251811150.724-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane writes:
> I also don't see any privilege of this type in SQL92 (which does have
> the concept of setuid functions, in the form of modules).
SQL99 has setuid functions in the form of setuid functions, with a syntax
like CREATE FUNCTION .... SECURITY { INVOKER | DEFINER } (too lazy to look
up the details). There were some peculiar differences IIRC, such as
trigger functions executing with the permission of the trigger creator
(which is yet different).
Modules are more like "packages", AFAICT.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-06-25 16:34:03 | Re: AW: AW: AW: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions |
| Previous Message | Barry Lind | 2001-06-25 15:43:36 | Re: [HACKERS] Instrumenting and Logging in JDBC |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-06-25 16:34:03 | Re: AW: AW: AW: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions |
| Previous Message | Barry Lind | 2001-06-25 15:41:52 | Re: [ADMIN] High memory usage [PATCH] |