| From: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [0/4] Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches |
| Date: | 2008-05-06 19:11:38 |
| Message-ID: | 20080506191138.GM30580@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 02:56:41PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> AFAICS the only thing left that really needs to be discussed more during
> this commit-fest is the business about whether it's sane to be trying to
> apply selinux restrictions in simple_heap_update and friends.
I don't have any opinion about the patches, obviously, but I'm
wondering whether there is, somewhere, an outline of what the _goals_
of this system are. If we have requirements that we can measure the
implementation against, we can know whether to throw away a particular
goal as being basically incompatible with the design of Postgres
(i.e. not an "enhancement" but a "reconception") or else as being
implementable with another approach.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-05-06 19:28:25 | Re: [0/4] Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-05-06 18:56:41 | Re: [0/4] Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-05-06 19:28:25 | Re: [0/4] Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-05-06 18:56:41 | Re: [0/4] Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches |