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

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings
Дата
Msg-id 27428.1189518804@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings  (Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>)
Ответы Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings  (Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>)
Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes:
> I have a question about what does happen if search path is not defined 
> for SECURITY DEFINER function. My expectation is that SECURITY DEFINER 
> function should defined empty search patch in this case.

Your expectation is incorrect.  We are not in the business of breaking
every application in sight, which is what that would do.  Nor do I think
it's a good plan to try to be smarter than the programmer.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: What is happening on buildfarm member dugong
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: CSStorm occurred again by postgreSQL8.2