Zhaomo, * Zhaomo Yang (zhy...@cs.ucsd.edu) wrote: > You are right. Using unlogged table is a good idea. I'll try it out. > Thanks for your advice!
Happy to help. Another option would be to have a custom GUC for this information. The issue we have with that currently is that it can be set by anyone.. Your extension could create one and register functions which are called when it's set though, and only allow it to be set when the auth/deauth functions are used. This would get rid of the need for any kind of table. > Currently auth functions are security definer functions. I'm gonna try > to create a patch using unlogged table + RLS and put it online (e.g. > this mail list) so that people can try it. I'd strongly suggest that you look into creating PostgreSQL extensions and using that mechanism as a way to distribute your security definer functions and other components of this solution as a single, complete, package which users can install with just "CREATE EXTENSION ...". That might help with both getting others to test and play with your solution. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature