| From: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Joshua Brindle <method(at)manicmethod(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: How to get SE-PostgreSQL acceptable | 
| Date: | 2009-02-01 02:46:03 | 
| Message-ID: | 49850CEB.6030209@kaigai.gr.jp | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Robert Haas wrote:
>>> IANAC, but that's my impression too.  The simplified patch shouldn't
>>> assume that row-level security in its current form is going to end up
>>> getting put back in.  AFAICS, there's no reason why the security ID
>>> for tables can't be a regular attribute in pg_class, or why the
>>> security attribute for columns can't be a regular attribute in
>>> pg_attribute.
>> If it is "identifier", it can be compoundable.
>>
>> I dislike it is held as "text". It fundamentaly breaks SE-PostgreSQL's
>> architecture, and requires to scrap near future.
> 
> I think the column in pg_attribute and pg_class can and should be an
> OID.  The issue is whether it's a regular OID column or a new system
> column.  Stephen and I are saying it should be a regular column.
> pg_security can stick around to map OIDs to text labels.
OK, I accept to omit a facility to save security id on padding field
of HeapTupleHeader *in this step*, if is has no other matter unexpected.
One melancholic thing is adding a member into pg_proc.
It defines more than 2000 of entries which I have to modify correctly. :(
Is there any script to help it?
Thanks,
-- 
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hiroshi Saito | 2009-02-01 02:51:06 | Re: pgevent warnings on mingw | 
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-02-01 02:41:40 | Re: adding stuff to parser, question |