Re: sandboxing untrusted code

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: sandboxing untrusted code
Date: 2026-04-24 00:27:58
Message-ID: d59652f3c7896b1815c713e8266b6147ac0a7b1b.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 2026-04-18 at 15:11 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Returning to this topic after some time, I have realized that both of
> these rules are inadequate.

I agree with others that perfection isn't required.

I am slightly worried about how hard this will be to document. But if
we solve a good portion of the problem, we can at least document some
best practices, even if the underlying mechanisms are complex.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Lamberson 2026-04-24 00:44:08 Re: Extensible sync handler registration (register_sync_handler)
Previous Message Mark Dilger 2026-04-23 23:41:13 Re: GUC parameter ACLs and physical walsender