Marko Kreen wrote: > On 1/6/06, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> wrote: > > Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > > It might be nice to split nextval and currval access as well. nextval > > > access > > > corresponds to INSERT and currval access to SELECT. > > > > Uh, that is already in the code. nextval()/setval() is UPDATE, and > > currval() is SELECT. > > This seems weird. Shouldn't nextval/currval go together and setval > separately?
Uh, logically, yes, but practially currval just reads/SELECTs, while nextval modifies/UPDATEs. > Considering there's no currval() without nextval(), what point > is disallowing currval() when user is able to call nextval()? Not sure. I think SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION would make it possible. > I rather want to allow nextval/currval and disable setval as it > allows regular user to DoS the database. Oh, interesting. We could easily have INSERT control that if we wanted, but I think you have to make a clear use case to override the risk of breaking applications. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
