Re: Proposing COPY .. WITH PERMISSIVE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From dinesh kumar
Subject Re: Proposing COPY .. WITH PERMISSIVE
Date
Msg-id CALnrH7qyM0dpXMfdUuhxsZernd+0X8_o5nWvqgZtp8jNrs-jGw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposing COPY .. WITH PERMISSIVE  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Proposing COPY .. WITH PERMISSIVE  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:19 PM, dinesh kumar <dineshkumar02@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry for my  unclear description about the proposal.
>
> "WITH PERMISSIVE" is equal to our existing behavior. That is, chmod=644 on
> the created files.
>
> If User don't specify "PERMISSIVE" as an option, then the chmod=600 on
> created files. In this way, we can restrict the other users from reading
> these files.

There might be some benefit in allowing the user to choose the
permissions, but (1) I doubt we want to change the default behavior
and (2) providing only two options doesn't seem flexible enough.


Thanks for your inputs Robert.

1) IMO, we will keep the exiting behavior as it is.

2) As the actual proposal talks about the permissions of group/others. So, we can add few options as below to the WITH clause

COPY
..
..
WITH 
NO
(READ,WRITE)
PERMISSION TO  
(GROUP,OTHERS)
]

Best Regards,
Dinesh
 
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Petr Jelinek
Date:
Subject: Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape
Next
From: Kouhei Kaigai
Date:
Subject: Re: fdw_scan_tlist for foreign table scans breaks EPQ testing, doesn't it?