On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 02:05:05PM +0100, Thom Brown wrote: > On 10 October 2014 13:43, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On 10 October 2014 11:45, Thom Brown <t...@linux.com> wrote: > > > >> To be honest, this all sounds rather flaky. > > > > To be honest, suggesting anything at all is rather difficult and I > > recommend people try it. > > I have, and most ideas I've had have been justifiably shot down or > picked apart (scheduled background tasks, offloading stats collection > to standby, index maintenance in DML query plans, expression > statistics... to name but a few). > > > Everything sounds crap when you didn't think of it and you've given it > > an hour's thought. > > I'm not sure that means my concerns aren't valid. I don't think it > sounds crap, but I also can't see any use-case for it where we don't > already have things covered, or where it's going to offer any useful > level of security. Like with RLS, it may be that I'm just looking at > things from the wrong perspective.
Agreed. The problem isn't giving it only an hours thought --- it is that we can come up with serious problems in five _seconds_ of thought. Unless you can some up with a solution to those issues, I am not sure why we are even talking about it. My other concern is you must have realized these issues in five seconds too, so why didn't you mention them? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
