On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 08:06:57PM +0700, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
On Thu, August 31, 2006 18:56, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
With time, it becomes ever clearer to me that prepared SQL
statements are just a really bad idea. On some days, it seems like
half the performance problems in
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:40:13PM +0400, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
devel=# select 'blah foo bar'::tsvector = 'blah foo bar'::tsvector;
?column?
--
f
(1 row)
Fixed in 8.1 and HEAD. Thank you
Things still seem to be broken for me. Among other things, the script at
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 09:54:38PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
Not the least of which is that arguments involving people can install
C code into the backend and break security are truisms: installed C
code can do *anything* which is why only superusers can install such
functions...
All right, I give up. I guess no one seems to want to admit this is a
bad security policy, or accurately document it. Does that make it an
easter egg?
On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 01:59:43PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, text again updated:
For schemas, allows access to objects
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 06:36:30PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I'm sure some people agree that there is a problem. It would help,
however, if you were not talking about two different things at once.
And it would help if you actually proposed a change that would improve
matters.
What
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 04:40:45PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What we should really do is have lastval() fail if the user does not
have appropiate permissions on the schema. Having it not fail is a bug,
and documenting a bug turns it not into a feature,
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 05:01:37PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What we should really do is have lastval() fail if the user does not
have appropiate permissions on the schema. Having it not fail is a bug,
and documenting a bug turns
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 07:17:31PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Phil Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've recently migrated one of my databases to using veil. This involved
creating a 'private' schema and moving all tables to it.
...
In doing so, I found to my extreme displeasure that although
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 06:09:31PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Phil Frost wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:37:37AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Updated text:
For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified
schema (assuming that the objects' own
On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 02:42:49PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Updated text:
For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified
schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements are
also met). Essentially this allows the grantee to quotelook
I could really use a --view option to pg_dump (and pg_restore, i
imagine). This would instruct pg_dump to dump just a named view, much
like --table, --trigger, --function, etc. Could this maybe be added to a
todo list?
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:37:37AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Updated text:
For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified
schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements are
also met). Essentially this allows the grantee to quotelook
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 12:49:54PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Docs updated:
para
For schemas, allows the grantee to find objects contained in the
specified schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements
are also met).
/para
I think that
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 08:24:08PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 01:42:27PM -0400, Phil Frost wrote:
I think that misses the point. One can easily find objects in a schema
without usage by examining the system catalogs. The point is that there
are ways
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 02:32:24PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 05:47:33PM -0400, Jim Nasby wrote:
On Jul 6, 2006, at 11:02 AM, Phil Frost wrote:
I hope the above example is strong enough to elicit a comment from a
qualified developer. If it is not, consider
On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 05:57:08PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I am well aware of what security definer means. The significant part of
this example is that lastval() will allow the caller to see the value of
a sequence where currval('seq') will not. This means that things which
might
I've recently migrated one of my databases to using veil. This involved
creating a 'private' schema and moving all tables to it. Functions
remain in public, and secured views are created there which can be
accessed by normal users.
In doing so, I found to my extreme displeasure that although the
test=# create schema private;
CREATE SCHEMA
test=# create sequence private.seq;
CREATE SEQUENCE
test=# create function bump() returns bigint language sql security definer as
$$ select nextval('private.seq'); $$;
CREATE FUNCTION
test=# revoke usage on schema private from pfrost;
REVOKE
test=#
On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 08:06:12PM -0400, Chris Campbell wrote:
On Jul 5, 2006, at 14:51, Phil Frost wrote:
test=# create function bump() returns bigint language sql security
definer as $$ select nextval('private.seq'); $$;
SECURITY DEFINER means that the function runs
I have an optimization I'd like to see which I think should be pretty
easy for someone familiar with the planner code to implement. My
situation is this: I have an application using veil[1]. Essentially, I
have a schema private and another public. Private contains regular
tables, where private
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 05:11:59PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 10:35:37AM -0400, Phil Frost wrote:
I have an optimization I'd like to see which I think should be pretty
easy for someone familiar with the planner code to implement. My
situation is this: I
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 11:40:52AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Phil Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The planner in fact can move the function around without changing the
output.
Not when it's within the nullable side of an outer join --- moving a
WHERE clause up out of that would make
22 matches
Mail list logo
