On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 03:18:21PM -0400, Adam Brightwell wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> wrote: >> >> Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> writes: >> >>> There are use cases where row_security=force will be set in production >> >>> environments, not only in testing. > >> > Noah's suggestion of using a per table attribute >> > would work -- in fact I like the idea of that better than using the >> > current GUC. >> >> FWIW, I also concur with a per table attribute for this purpose. In >> fact, I think I really like the per-table flexibility over an >> 'all-or-nothing' approach better too. > > Great. Robert, does that work for you, too?
Yes, that seems like a fine design from my point of view. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
