| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules Bernd Helmle |
| Date: | 2009-01-27 20:24:18 |
| Message-ID: | 200901272224.19139.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday 27 January 2009 17:19:28 Tom Lane wrote:
> If we'd had the SQL-spec behavior from day one, it wouldn't be a
> problem, but you can't just blow off the old behavior like that.
> It's a potential security hole, since GRANT ALL on a view used to
> be de facto the same as GRANT SELECT, if you hadn't bothered to
> create any rules.
That is a good point. But the only clean solution would be to make views
never updatable by default, and invent a nonstandard syntax to make them so,
which seems very unattractive to me. A GUC variable as a transition measure
could work, though.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-27 20:36:01 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules Bernd Helmle |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-27 16:07:35 | Re: pgsql: Silence compiler warning on win32. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-01-27 20:28:19 | Re: Commitfest infrastructure (was Re: 8.4 release planning) |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2009-01-27 20:20:33 | Re: pg_upgrade project status |