Re: [PATCH] Add reloption for views to enable RLS

From: Christoph Heiss <christoph(dot)heiss(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, walther(at)technowledgy(dot)de, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Hans-Jürgen Schönig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add reloption for views to enable RLS
Date: 2022-03-08 17:17:36
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/2/22 11:10, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> For my part, I find myself more and more convinced that
> "security_invoker" is the right name, because it matches the
> terminology used for functions, and in other database systems. I think
> the parallels between security invoker functions and security invoker
> views are quite strong.
> [..]
> What are other people's opinions?

Since there don't seem to be any more objections to "security_invoker" I
attached v10 renaming it again.

I've tried to better clarify the whole invoker vs. definer thing in the
CREATE VIEW documentation by explicitly mentioning that
"security_invoker=false" is _not_ the same as "security definer", based
on the earlier discussions.

This should hopefully avoid any implicit associations.


Attachment Content-Type Size
v10-0001-Add-new-boolean-reloption-security_invoker-to-vi.patch text/x-patch 32.6 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-03-08 17:19:34 Re: New developer papercut - Makefile references INSTALL
Previous Message Jeevan Ladhe 2022-03-08 16:58:34 Re: refactoring basebackup.c