| From: | mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not? |
| Date: | 2006-05-01 15:21:38 |
| Message-ID: | 20060501152138.GA30595@mark.mielke.cc |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:18:13AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc writes:
> > If the user is specifying the default expression, they can specify
> > SECURITY DEFINER themselves, yes?
> Not unless they write a wrapper function to be a security definer
> and call nextval().
Ah. I was wondering about that. When I saw the first poster tag
'SECURITY DEFINER' on the end of the expression I assumed it was
something that I didn't know you could do... :-)
mark
--
mark(at)mielke(dot)cc / markm(at)ncf(dot)ca / markm(at)nortel(dot)com __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-01 15:25:33 | Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-01 15:18:13 | Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not? |