From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Yeb Havinga <yeb(dot)havinga(at)portavita(dot)nl> |
Subject: | Re: RLS Design |
Date: | 2014-07-11 18:30:17 |
Message-ID: | CAOuzzgrxiXJkt1nkxH+TFhy8OHRffBpg-CeczcKzmXE_LsygLQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert,
On Friday, July 11, 2014, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:55 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > My feeling at the moment is that having them be per-table makes sense and
> > we'd still have flexibility to change later if we had some compelling
> reason
> > to do so.
>
> I don't think you can really change it later. If policies are
> per-table, then you could have a policy p1 on table t1 and also on
> table t2; if they become global objects, then you can't have p1 in two
> places. I hope I'm not beating a dead horse here, but changing syntax
> after it's been released is very, very hard.
Fair enough. My thinking was we'd come up with a way to map them (eg:
table_policy), but I do agree that changing it later would really suck and
having them be per-table makes a lot of sense.
> But that's not an argument against doing it this way; I think
> per-table policies are probably simpler and better here. It means,
> for example, that policies need not have their own permissions and
> ownership structure - they're part of the table, just like a
> constraint, trigger, or rule, and the table owner's permissions
> control. I like that, and I think our users will, too.
Agreed and I believe this is more-or-less what I had proposed up-thread
(not at a computer at the moment). I hope to have a chance to review and
update the design and flush out the catalog definition this weekend.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2014-07-11 18:47:23 | Re: Minmax indexes |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-07-11 17:45:10 | Re: things I learned from working on memory allocation |