On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 14:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Joshua Brindle <met...@manicmethod.com> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Right, which is why it's bad for something like a foreign key constraint > >> to expose the fact that the row does exist after all. > > > Once again, this is not an issue for us. > > Yes it is an issue
> The question of whether there is a covert channel is only a small part > of my complaint here. If it's the judgement of security experts that > that's an acceptable thing, that's fine, it's their turf. But SQL > behavior is my turf, and I'm not happy with discarding fundamental > semantic properties. Why did we bother to invite Joshua here if we aren't going to listen to him? Thanks for coming to help Joshua, much appreciated. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
