> I'm not convinced this is the right place, but at a minimum it should be
> referenced from the RLS documentation. Further, it should be noted that
> users who have direct SQL access can control what the isolation level
> is for their transaction.
I agree that it should be referenced by the RLS
* Adam Brightwell (adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> Thoughts? Trying to keep it straight-forward and provide a simple
> >> solution for users to be able to addre
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Thoughts? Trying to keep it straight-forward and provide a simple
>> solution for users to be able to address the issue, if they're worried
>> about it. Perhaps this, plus an additio
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Thoughts? Trying to keep it straight-forward and provide a simple
> solution for users to be able to address the issue, if they're worried
> about it. Perhaps this, plus an additional paragraph which goes into
> more detail about exactly wha
* Peter Geoghegan (p...@heroku.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > If you're using another well known MVCC database system that has RLS,
> > I imagine when this happens the attacker similarly waits on the
> > conflicting (privileged) xact to finish (in my exam
Robert,
As I mentioned up thread, I'm out until the 27th. I have posted a patch
which I will push to fix the copy.c issue, and I have already stated that
I'll address the statistics issue. Further, Joe has also been working on
issues but he was out of pocket last week attending a conference.
I'm
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 8:56 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> If you're using another well known MVCC database system that has RLS,
>> I imagine when this happens the attacker similarly waits on the
>> conflicting (privileged) xact to finish
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> If you're using another well known MVCC database system that has RLS,
> I imagine when this happens the attacker similarly waits on the
> conflicting (privileged) xact to finish (in my example in the patch,
> Bob's xact). However, unlike wi
Very minor concern about RLS
This existing ExecUpdate() comment seems a little inaccurate:
/*
* Check any RLS UPDATE WITH CHECK policies
*
* If we generate a new candidate tuple after EvalPlanQual testing, we
* must loop back here and recheck any RLS policies and constrai
