Re: leaky views, yet again - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: leaky views, yet again
Date
Msg-id AANLkTin7Nr_e6yObKjUcu+SCpxHXsAAUKip0dkN6Q=Hb@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: leaky views, yet again  (KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>)
Responses Re: leaky views, yet again  (KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>)
Re: leaky views, yet again  (KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
2010/9/1 KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>:
> Right now, it stands on a strict assumption that considers operators
> implemented with built-in functions are safe; it does not have no
> possibility to leak supplied arguments anywhere.
>
> Please note that this patch does not case about a case when
> a function inside a view and a function outside a view are
> distributed into same level and the later function has lower
> cost value.

Without making some attempt to address these two points, I don't see
the point of this patch.

Also, I believe we decided previously do this deoptimization only in
case the user requests it with CREATE SECURITY VIEW.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: compiling with RELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE doesn't pass regression
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: multibyte charater set in levenshtein function