From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ON CONFLICT issues around whole row vars, |
Date: | 2015-10-02 00:41:25 |
Message-ID: | CAM3SWZR_cJgi=+nL3BjeDG+x8jBsLu=9iwkcDa1vLQQhj1fPaA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> I'm can't see how the current code can do anything sensible at all. What
> do you think is going to be the effect of an excluded row that doesn't
> meet security quals? Even if it worked in the sense that the correct
> data were accessed and every - which I doubt is completely the case as
> things stands given there's no actual scan node and stuff - you'd still
> have EXCLUDED.* being used in the projection for the new version of the
> tuple.
>
> As far as I can see the only correct thing you could do in that
> situation is error out.
I agree. I wasn't defending the current code (although that might have
been made unclear by the "technically wasn't a bug" remark).
Note that I'm not telling you what I think needs to happen. I'm just
explaining my understanding of what has happened.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2015-10-02 00:50:02 | Re: Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-10-02 00:12:32 | Re: ON CONFLICT issues around whole row vars, |