Re: Not quite a security hole in internal_in

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Gurjeet Singh
Тема Re: Not quite a security hole in internal_in
Дата
Msg-id 65937bea0906091123l7caf5d54o4d72cd4d39d6f3c3@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Not quite a security hole in internal_in  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Not quite a security hole in internal_in  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> This will ensure the fix is in place and protecting future coding,
>> although possibly not getting enforced in 8.4 production instances that
>> were upgraded from beta (if there are any such).

> How common is this scenario? It's certainly not something I ever do.

I would agree that it should be pretty darn rare.  But even so, this
is not a fix for an immediate bug but just safety against possible
future bugs.  So even if there is somebody out there who manages to miss
having the fix, I think they are not at serious risk.


Can we hold it till 8.4.1? Or is that not an option?

Best regards,
--
Lets call it Postgres

EnterpriseDB      http://www.enterprisedb.com

gurjeet[.singh]@EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | hotmail | indiatimes | yahoo }.com
Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: information_schema.columns changes needed for OLEDB
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: information_schema.columns changes needed for OLEDB