| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Fix leaky VIEWs for RLS |
| Date: | 2010-06-04 09:26:10 |
| Message-ID: | m28w6v87yl.fsf@hi-media.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> The proposal some time back in this thread was to trust all built-in
> functions and no others. That's a bit simplistic, no doubt, but it
> seems to me to largely solve the performance problem and to do so with
> minimal effort. When and if you get to a solution that's committable
> with respect to everything else, it might be time to think about
> more flexible answers to that particular point.
What about trusting all "internal" and "C" language function instead? My
understanding is that "internal" covers built-in functions, and as you
need to be a superuser to CREATE a "C" language function, surely you're
able to accept that by doing so you get to trust it?
How useful would that be?
--
dim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nikolay Samokhvalov | 2010-06-04 09:53:37 | Re: rfc: changing documentation about xpath |
| Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2010-06-04 05:24:54 | Re: [PATCH] Fix leaky VIEWs for RLS |