2012/12/22 Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com>: > On 21 December 2012 22:01, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > >>> On the other hand, we are standing next to the consensus about >>> reader-side; a unique row-security policy (so, first version does not >>> support per-command policy) shall be checked on table scanning >>> on select, update or delete commands. >> >> I don't feel that we've really reached a consensus about the >> 'reader-side' implemented in this patch- rather, we've agreed (at a >> pretty high level) what the default impact of RLS for SELECT queries is. >> While I'm glad that we were able to do that, I'm rather dismayed that it >> took a great deal of discussion to get to that point. > > Would anybody like to discuss this on a conference call on say 28th > Dec, to see if we can agree a way forwards? I feel certain that we can > work through any difficulties and agree a minimal subset for change. > All comers welcome, just contact me offlist for details. > Of course, I'll join the conference. Please give me the detail.
Thanks, -- KaiGai Kohei <kai...@kaigai.gr.jp> -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
