Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268)
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 9834.1229020345@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268) (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268)
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On Thursday 11 December 2008 18:32:50 Tom Lane wrote:
>>> How can we stick all of these in the same column at the same time?
>>
>> Why would we want to?
> Because we want to use SQL-based row access control and SELinux-based row
> access control at the same time. Isn't this exactly one of the objections
> upthread? Both must be available at the same time.
Well, the objection I was raising is that they should control the same
thing. Otherwise we are simply inventing an invasive, high-cost,
nonstandard(*) feature that we have had zero field demand for.
regards, tom lane
(*) Worse than nonstandard: it actively breaks semantics demanded by
the standard. If I had my druthers we would flat out reject row-level
security filtering of any kind. I don't want us to expend a lot of
effort implementing multiple kinds.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: