Re: proposal: schema variables

2017-11-02 16:35 GMT+01:00 Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com>:

> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:05:54PM +0530, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > > The variables can be modified by SQL command SET (this is taken from
> > > standard, and it natural)
> > >
> > > SET varname = expression;
> >
> > Overloading SET to handle both variables and GUCs seems likely to
> > create problems, possibly including security problems. For example,
> > maybe a security-definer function could leave behind variables to
> > trick the calling code into failing to set GUCs that it intended to
> > set. Or maybe creating a variable at the wrong time will just break
> > things randomly.
>
> That's already true of GUCs, since there are no access controls on
> set_config()/current_setting().
>
> Presumably "schema variables" would really just be GUC-like and not at
> all like lexically scoped variables. And also subject to access
> controls, thus an overall improvement on set_config()/current_setting().
>
> With access controls, GUCs could become schema variables, and settings
> from postgresql.conf could move into the database itself (which I think
> would be nice).
>

I am sorry, but I don't plan it. the behave of GUC is too different than
behave of variables. But I am planning so system GUC can be "moved" to
pg_catalog to be possibility to specify any object exactly.

Regards

Pavel

>
> Nico
> --
>