Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings
Date
Msg-id 27428.1189518804@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings  (Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>)
Responses Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings
Re: Per-function search_path => per-function GUC settings
List pgsql-hackers
Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes:
> I have a question about what does happen if search path is not defined 
> for SECURITY DEFINER function. My expectation is that SECURITY DEFINER 
> function should defined empty search patch in this case.

Your expectation is incorrect.  We are not in the business of breaking
every application in sight, which is what that would do.  Nor do I think
it's a good plan to try to be smarter than the programmer.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: What is happening on buildfarm member dugong
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: CSStorm occurred again by postgreSQL8.2