From: | dinesh kumar <dineshkumar02(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposing COPY .. WITH PERMISSIVE |
Date: | 2015-07-24 00:15:50 |
Message-ID: | CALnrH7qyM0dpXMfdUuhxsZernd+0X8_o5nWvqgZtp8jNrs-jGw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:19 PM, dinesh kumar <dineshkumar02(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > Sorry for my unclear description about the proposal.
> >
> > "WITH PERMISSIVE" is equal to our existing behavior. That is, chmod=644
> on
> > the created files.
> >
> > If User don't specify "PERMISSIVE" as an option, then the chmod=600 on
> > created files. In this way, we can restrict the other users from reading
> > these files.
>
> There might be some benefit in allowing the user to choose the
> permissions, but (1) I doubt we want to change the default behavior
> and (2) providing only two options doesn't seem flexible enough.
>
>
Thanks for your inputs Robert.
1) IMO, we will keep the exiting behavior as it is.
2) As the actual proposal talks about the permissions of group/others. So,
we can add few options as below to the WITH clause
COPY
..
..
WITH
[
NO
(READ,WRITE)
PERMISSION TO
(GROUP,OTHERS)
]
Best Regards,
Dinesh
manojadinesh.blogspot.com
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kouhei Kaigai | 2015-07-24 00:27:33 | Re: fdw_scan_tlist for foreign table scans breaks EPQ testing, doesn't it? |
Previous Message | Petr Jelinek | 2015-07-23 23:55:55 | Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape |