KaiGai, * KaiGai Kohei (kai...@kaigai.gr.jp) wrote: > However, it requires the plugin modules need to know everything; > such as what is visible/invisible. It seems to me too closely- > coupled interface.
I agree with Robert on this one. We're not trying to design a wholly
independent security module system for any project to pick up and use
here. We're discussing hooks to go into PostgreSQL to support a
PostgreSQL security module. In other words, I don't think we need to
worry over if the PG-SELinux security module could be re-used for
another project or is too "PG specific". If it's *not* very PG
specific then something is wrong.
The issues we're talking about with regard to MVCC, visibility, etc,
would all be applicable to any serious database anyway.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
