| From: | "Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Douglas McNaught" <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: audit table containing Select statements submitted |
| Date: | 2006-05-17 02:52:21 |
| Message-ID: | 65937bea0605161952o27a8afaev1e23c1dfc2b0f67c@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Do we have any plans of introducing 'AUTONOMOUS TRANSACTION' like feature?
Again, it might not be a part of the standard.... but it is very
helpful in situations like these!!! You can run a trigger with an
autonomous transaction attached to it, which guarantees that the work
done by trigger persists even though the calling transaction rolls
back (potentially a hacker trying to cover his tracks)!!!
(http://asktom.oracle.com/~tkyte/autonomous/index.html)
Gurjeet.
On 5/16/06, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> Doug,
>
> > But what if the user calls the access function, sees the data, then
> > issues a ROLLBACK? The audit record would be rolled back as well (as
> > Tom pointed out earlier).
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Wheeler | 2006-05-17 02:56:25 | Re: PL/pgSQL 'i = i + 1' Syntax |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-17 02:52:02 | Re: PL/pgSQL 'i = i + 1' Syntax |