Re: [v10] CREATE TEMP FUNCTION/CREATE FUNCTION PG_TEMP.X

From: Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo(dot)romano(at)notorand(dot)it>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [v10] CREATE TEMP FUNCTION/CREATE FUNCTION PG_TEMP.X
Date: 2017-12-21 17:07:38
Message-ID: CAHjZ2x7BhSVA+S7fnmPvSbb6HimXCfOdMcFdHG+F27-ToTpfyw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

2017-12-21 17:56 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo(dot)romano(at)notorand(dot)it> writes:
>> 2017-12-21 17:52 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>>> You have to schema-qualify the temp function name when calling it, too.
>
>> So search_path is not used with functions?
>
> pg_temp is explicitly ignored when searching for functions/operators.
> Otherwise, installing a trojan horse is just too easy.
>
> regards, tom lane

I'm not sure whether this decision actually makes PG more scure.
But, anyway, thanks for the insight: I've just found the
documentations for this.

--
Vincenzo Romano - NotOrAnd.IT
Information Technologies
--
NON QVIETIS MARIBVS NAVTA PERITVS

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hans Schou 2017-12-21 20:35:04 Re: Deadlock with one table - PostgreSQL is doing it right
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-12-21 16:56:14 Re: [v10] CREATE TEMP FUNCTION/CREATE FUNCTION PG_TEMP.X