Re: Specification for Trusted PLs?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Specification for Trusted PLs?
Date: 2010-05-21 18:21:37
Message-ID: 21876.1274466097@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> So... can we get back to coming up with a reasonable
> definition,

(1) no access to system calls (including file and network I/O)

(2) no access to process memory, other than variables defined within the
PL.

What else?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-05-21 18:22:33 Re: Specification for Trusted PLs?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-05-21 18:12:09 Re: Specification for Trusted PLs?