Re: [v9.3] Row-Level Security - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kohei KaiGai
Subject Re: [v9.3] Row-Level Security
Date
Msg-id CADyhKSWDXFx3iy8UzhC1x4ubcEtOp7q+qK5CwD-uFanHCe22Xw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [v9.3] Row-Level Security  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Responses Re: [v9.3] Row-Level Security  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
2012/12/3 David Fetter <david@fetter.org>:
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 03:20:28PM +0100, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> > However, UPDATE / DELETE support is not perfect right now.
>> > In case when we try to update / delete a table with inherited
>> > children and RETURNING clause was added, is loses right
>> > references to the pseudo columns, even though it works fine
>> > without inherited children.
>> >
>> The attached patch fixed this known problem.
>
> This patch no longer applies to git master.  Any chance of a rebase?
>
OK, I'll rebese it.

> Also, might this approach work for the catalog?  The use case I have
> in mind is multi-tenancy, although one can imagine organizations where
> internal access controls might be required on it, too.
>
If you intend to control behavior of DDL commands that internally takes
access towards system catalog, RLS feature is not helpful.
Please use sepgsql instead. :-)
If you intend to control DML commands towards system catalogs, here
is nothing special, so I expect it works as we are doing at user tables.

Thanks,
-- 
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp>



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL