From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | calebmeredith8(at)gmail(dot)com, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #13780: Multiple commands not allowed for creating a policy. |
Date: | 2015-11-23 14:59:55 |
Message-ID: | 20151123145955.GG3685@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Michael,
* Michael Paquier (michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 10:23 PM, <calebmeredith8(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > This doesn't seem to be intended as the GRANT specification allows it, and
> > CREATE POLICY supports the ALL command.
>
> Yeah, I would tend to agree that the existence of ALL contradicts the
> expression constraints that are in place when defining a non-ALL policy as
> we could basically ignore either the WITH CHECK or USING clauses defined in
> a policy defined depending on the DML or SELECT command used. To be more
> exact, for example with an ALL policy that has both a WITH CHECK and USING
> defined, we would ignore the USING clause with an INSERT query, right? We
> are in beta2 state now, so I don't think anything is going to change, but
> Stephen, your thoughts perhaps?
We could support allowing multiple commands for a policy and would just
need to adjust the checks to make sure that the policy definition makes
sense, but that's all new-feature type of work which would be for 9.6
and not a bug in the current implementation. I'm certainly not against
doing that, but it doesn't seem like a terribly high priority.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Caleb Meredith | 2015-11-23 15:19:49 | Re: BUG #13780: Multiple commands not allowed for creating a policy. |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2015-11-23 14:57:45 | Re: BUG #13780: Multiple commands not allowed for creating a policy. |