| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com |
| Cc: | "Dickson S(dot) Guedes" <listas(at)guedesoft(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Patch to fix search_path defencies with pg_bench |
| Date: | 2009-05-06 21:04:57 |
| Message-ID: | 27748.1241643897@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 17:42 -0300, Dickson S. Guedes wrote:
>> But, there is the possibility that someone are using an automated script
>> that could be broken by this change?
> Only if the role pgbench is using as an explicit search_path set.
Even then, it's not a problem from the point of view of pgbench ---
the tables will still get created and used correctly. The only problem
shows up if someone is ignoring the existing warning in the docs and
running pgbench in a database that has application tables named accounts
&etc. If you're doing that you're at considerable risk anyway, no
matter *what* we do or don't do with pgbench's search path.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-05-06 21:13:27 | Re: Patch to fix search_path defencies with pg_bench |
| Previous Message | Dickson S. Guedes | 2009-05-06 21:01:57 | Re: Patch to fix search_path defencies with pg_bench |