Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules Bernd Helmle

From: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules Bernd Helmle
Date: 2009-01-27 13:49:52
Message-ID: 8767BE9896281E9C7666BB54@teje
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

--On Dienstag, Januar 27, 2009 14:04:05 +0200 Peter Eisentraut
<peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:

>> a view should be updatable by default if the query expression is
>> updatable... what we need is something to make a view READ ONLY even
>> if it should be updatable by spec...
>
> A view is read-only if you don't grant any write permissions on it.

What i'm seeing here is a very divergent understanding what a "read-only"
view is:

old-school PostgreSQL-Users would expect a "read-only" view to have no
"write action" installed. If we want to follow the standard closely, they
need to be installed automatically, changing this behavior, hence the wish
to have a syntax to restore the old behavior (e.g. for pg_dump). I'm unsure
what the correct approach looks like, but it seems we need a compromise.

--
Thanks

Bernd

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-01-27 15:06:40 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules Bernd Helmle
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2009-01-27 12:46:16 pgsql: Silence compiler warning on win32.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2009-01-27 13:50:38 Re: Commitfest infrastructure (was Re: 8.4 release planning)
Previous Message Dave Page 2009-01-27 13:47:36 Re: Commitfest infrastructure (was Re: 8.4 release planning)