Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Thursday 11 December 2008 20:32:25 Tom Lane wrote: > > Well, the objection I was raising is that they should control the same > > thing. Otherwise we are simply inventing an invasive, high-cost, > > nonstandard(*) feature that we have had zero field demand for. > > There is certainly a rather big field demand for row-level security. I'm not > sure about SELinux integration, though, or which one of the two you were > referring to. > > The trick, of course, is to make it work well. That would usually require > the > polyinstantiation approach, and I am disappointed that that was apparently > not chosen here.
Polyinstantiation was just too complex to do at this point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyinstantiation -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers