Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1268)

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> KaiGai Kohei wrote:
>>> If we use some type of integer, I suggest using this structure for
>>> pg_security:
>>>
>>> CREATE TABLE pg_security(
>>> relid oid,
>>> secid int2,
>>> secacl aclitem[],
>>> secext TEXT
>>> );
>>>
>>> This allows the per-row value to be a simple int2. It also improves
>>> maintenance because rows are associated only with a specific table;
>>> unused values can then be removed more easily. And it allows both
>>> secacl and secext security to be specified.
>> How does the approach resolve the pain of user interface?
>> I don't think packing two or more values into one field is not a right way.
>
> I see later emails that say we have to have both security methods
> available at the same time, and the table above does that. There would
> be one security oid on every row and it would refer to this table.

I understand the voice for simultaneous support both of DAC and MAC.
If so, I strongly desire two security column and two security field
which can store its own attribute independently.

Sorry, I cannot think compounding two values into one field is
a reasonable solution.

Thanks,
--
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>