| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Largeobject access controls |
| Date: | 2009-09-24 01:38:11 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f070909231838q814a06bma24dbb0d049c736c@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/9/23 KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>:
> Now, I'm revising the patch as follows:
> - pg_largeobject_meta is renamed to pg_largeobject_metadata
> - The GUC of largeobject_compat_dac is renamed to largeobject_compat_acl
> - psql supports \dl to show owner of the largeobject
> - add documentation for the GUC, and add it to the postgresql.conf.sample
I still don't like the idea of having a GUC that turns off a
substantial part of the security system.
Am I the only one?
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-09-24 01:58:33 | Re: pg_hba.conf: samehost and samenet [REVIEW] |
| Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2009-09-24 01:19:10 | Re: [PATCH] Largeobject access controls |