From: | "Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Kohei KaiGai" <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>,"Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,"Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Review of Row Level Security |
Date: | 2012-12-22 20:13:41 |
Message-ID: | 20121222201341.144680@gmx.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> RLS entry of wiki has not been updated for long time, I'll try to
> update the entry for high-level design in a couple of days.
Thanks, I think that is essential for a productive discussion of
the issue.
For me, it would help tremendously if you could provide a very
short statement of the over-arching goal of the current development
effort. As an example, I could summarize the SSI development as:
"Ensure that the result of executing any set of successfully
committed serializable transactions is the same as having run those
transactions one at a time, without introducing any new blocking."
Proceeding from a general goal statement like that, to general
principles of how it will be achieved before getting down to
implementation details helps me put the details in proper context.
I apologize again for coming in so late with strong opinions, but I
thought I knew what "row level security" meant, and it was just a
question of how to do it, but I can't reconcile what I thought the
feature was about with the patch I'm seeing; perhaps it's just a
lack of the hight level context that's making it difficult.
-Kevin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-12-22 23:13:20 | Pg_upgrade faster, again! |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-22 19:20:56 | Re: pgcrypto seeding problem when ssl=on |