| From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Improving RLS planning |
| Date: | 2016-11-10 19:07:14 |
| Message-ID: | CAEZATCWvqtyiThHNzSOJAOHYM12A5QrVrBXXUPEVWeSp2YgQ_w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10 November 2016 at 17:12, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Yeah, I think we'd be best off to avoid the bare term "security".
> It's probably too late to change the RTE field name "securityQuals",
> but maybe we could uniformly call those "security barrier quals" in
> the comments. Then the basic terminology is that we have security
> barrier views and row-level security both implemented on top of
> security barrier quals, and we should be careful to use the right
> one of those three terms in comments/documentation.
>
+1 for that terminology and no renaming of fields.
Regards,
Dean
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yury Zhuravlev | 2016-11-10 19:15:04 | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-11-10 19:04:30 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |