Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Geoghegan
Тема Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table
Дата
Msg-id CAH2-WzkGw6YGPTvQeJRRaeNh=LEQxeqAWsX4vdynca8bc+oquQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> Also, ISTM that the code within ENRMetadataGetTupDesc() probably
> requires more explanation, resource management wise.

Also, it's not clear why it should be okay that the new type of
ephemeral RTEs introduced don't have permissions checks. There are
currently cases where the user cannot see data that they inserted
themselves (e.g., through RETURNING), on the theory that a before row
trigger might have modified the final contents of the tuple in a way
that the original inserter isn't supposed to know details about.

As the INSERT docs say, "Use of the RETURNING clause requires SELECT
privilege on all columns mentioned in RETURNING". Similarly, the
excluded.* pseudo-relation requires select privilege (on the
corresponding target relation columns) in order to be usable by ON
CONFLICT DO UPDATE.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Kevin Grittner
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017 : Proposal for predicate locking in gist index
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] Coverage improvements of src/bin/pg_basebackup and pg_receivewal --endpos