Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 14:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Joshua Brindle <method@manicmethod.com> writes:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Right, which is why it's bad for something like a foreign key constraint
> > >> to expose the fact that the row does exist after all.
> >
> > > Once again, this is not an issue for us.
> >
> > Yes it is an issue
>
> > The question of whether there is a covert channel is only a small part
> > of my complaint here. If it's the judgement of security experts that
> > that's an acceptable thing, that's fine, it's their turf. But SQL
> > behavior is my turf, and I'm not happy with discarding fundamental
> > semantic properties.
>
> Why did we bother to invite Joshua here if we aren't going to listen to
> him?
>
> Thanks for coming to help Joshua, much appreciated.
I agree. This is exactly the type of feedback I was hoping for.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
