Robert Haas wrote: > 2009/8/3 KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com>: >> I now plans to submit two patches for the next commit fest. >> The one is implementation of the abstraction layer. >> The other is basic implementation of the SE-PostgreSQL. > > Is this a good idea, or would it be better to focus on the aclcheck > stuff (which is what I understand you to mean here by abstraction > layer) first? You will be much happier getting one patch committed > than two patches not committed... getting two patches of this size in > one CommitFest seems very unlikely, and I worry that the SE-PostgreSQL > patch will distract your time and reviewing time from the aclcheck > refactoring that must get done first, and well.
Needless to say, the security abstraction layer shall have higher priority than SE-PostgreSQL which depends on the layer. If we can focus on the SE-PostgreSQL feature in the third commit fest, it will be better than all the facilities from the scratch. (BTW, I also have a WIP patch to support largeobject permissions.) So, we may be able to modify the development plan as follows: * 2nd CommitFest (15-Sep) - security abstraction layer (- largeobject permission) * 3rd CommitFest (15-Nov) - basic functionality of SE-PostgreSQL * 4th CommitFest (15-Jan) - full functionality of SE-PostgreSQL (row-level controls, filesystem permissions, ...) Thanks, -- OSS Platform Development Division, NEC KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
