Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David Fetter
Тема Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings
Дата
Msg-id 20070901225229.GA19705@fetter.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 12:41:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I believe we had consensus that 8.3 needs to include an easier way for a
> function to set a local value of search_path, as proposed here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg01717.php
> I've been holding off actually implementing that because adding a column
> to pg_proc would create merge problems for pending patches.  But tsearch
> was the last one with any major changes to pg_proc.h, so it's probably
> time to get on with it.
> 
> A few days ago, Simon suggested that we should generalize this notion
> to allow per-function settings of any GUC variable:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg01155.php
> My reaction to that was more or less "D'oh, of course!"  Stuff like
> regex_flavor can easily break a function.  So rather than thinking
> only about search_path, it seems to me we should implement a facility
> that allows function-local settings of any USERSET GUC variable, and
> probably also SUSET ones if the function is SECURITY DEFINER and owned by
> a superuser.
> 
> The most straightforward way to support this syntactically seems to
> be to follow the per-user and per-database GUC setting features:
> 
>     ALTER FUNCTION func(args) SET var = value

Would it be hard to extend this into this?
ALTER FUNCTION func(args) SET var = value [, var = value ...]

>     ALTER FUNCTION func(args) RESET var
> 
> The RESET alternative is a lot cleaner than my previous suggestion
> of "PATH NONE" to remove a non-default path setting, anyway.
> 
> I thought about ways to include GUC settings directly into CREATE
> FUNCTION, but it seemed pretty ugly and inconsistent with the
> existing syntax.  So I'm thinking of supporting only the above
> syntaxes, meaning it'll take at least two commands to create a
> secure SECURITY DEFINER function.

With the extended syntax I proposed it could take just one command to
create such a function :)

Cheers,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778        AIM: dfetter666                             Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Marko Kreen"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings