| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)compiler(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: security_definer_search_path GUC |
| Date: | 2021-06-07 21:26:27 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwaNFQcC5RafB=6NOB2KYn9n5BrFcrkBadgVbzoJe-Gg7Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 1:55 PM Joel Jacobson <joel(at)compiler(dot)org> wrote:
> If we don't like "UNQUALIFIED" as a keyword, maybe we could reuse "PUBLIC"?
> Or will that be confusing since "PUBLIC" is also a role_specification?
>
>
For me the concept resembles explicitly denoting certain schemas as being
simple tags, while the actual "namespace" is the GLOBAL namespace. Today
there is no global namespace, all schemas generate their own individual
namespace in addition to "tagging" their objects with a textual label.
Avoiding "public" is highly desirable.
To access a global object you should be able to still specify its schema
tag. Unqualified means "use search_path"; and "use search_path" includes
global. But there is a truth table waiting to be created to detail what
combinations result in errors (including where those errors occur - runtime
or creation time).
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2021-06-07 21:36:56 | Re: A modest proposal vis hierarchical queries: MINUS in the column list |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2021-06-07 21:22:36 | Re: security_definer_search_path GUC |