Re: Solution for RI permission problem

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Solution for RI permission problem
Date: 2000-09-20 18:06:16
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.10.10009201100050.57382-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


As a question, since I don't have a source tree available here at work,
will there be an issue if an elog occurs between the various two user id
sets? Just wondering, because most of those statements are do some
SPI thing or elog.

Stephan Szabo
sszabo(at)bigpanda(dot)com

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Here's what I've come up with to avoid "permission denied" errors when a
> RI trigger has to lock a PK table. Whenever the SELECT FOR UPDATE is
> executed I temporarily switch the current user id to the owner of the PK
> table. It's not the grand unified solution via setuid functions that was
> envisioned now and then, but it does the same conceptually. For a
> terminally elegant solution I can only suggest not using the SPI
> interface.
>
> I recommend this patch to be checked out by someone knowledgeable in the
> RI area.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marko Kreen 2000-09-20 19:11:59 [patch,rfc] binary operators on integers
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-09-20 17:46:28 Re: loss of portability in ecpg