Re: [PATCH] Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Why READ ONLY transactions? - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Sean Chittenden
Subject Re: [PATCH] Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Why READ ONLY transactions?
Date
Msg-id 20030730214005.GE34647@perrin.int.nxad.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Why READ ONLY transactions?  (Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Why READ ONLY transactions?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Re: [PATCH] Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Why READ ONLY transactions?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
> > > Um, why not make it an actual full blown security feature by
> > > applying the following patch?  This gives PostgreSQL real read
> > > only transactions that users can't escape from.  Notes about the
> > > patch:
> >
> > Way nifty.
> >
> > I vote in favor of this patch (suitably documented & debugged) for 7.5.
>
> Heh, there ain't much to debug: it's pretty straight forward.  I ran
> all the use cases/syntaxes I could think of and they worked as
> expected.  It's a pretty chump little ditty that I originally wrote
> for the sake of the 7.4 PR, but it's proving to be quite useful here
> in my tree...  though I like the name "jail_read_only_transactions"
> more...  patch updated for new name.

Err..  and attached.  -sc

--
Sean Chittenden

Attachment

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Sean Chittenden
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Why READ ONLY transactions?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Why READ ONLY transactions?