On Dec 18, Stephen Frost modulated: > I agree that it would be a nice addition, as I've said before. OK, sorry I misunderstood earlier and thought you were dismissing the idea as redundant with triggers. Thanks for your patience! > ... We certainly won't be adding it into 9.5 and it's getting pretty > late for 9.6 too, but I'm anxious to see just how RLS is used in the > field If we want to start testing with 9.5 and emulate an environment supporting NEW and OLD in the CHECK policy for UPDATE, can you recommend how we should do that? E.g., is there a particular trigger idiom that would most closely replicate the RLS extension we've been discussing (so that we'd know that a working policy set + triggers could be translated to just RLS policies if that feature is added)? We'd be happy to experiment with these sorts of policies in our applications. My intuition is that with this extension, we'd be able to push down nearly all of our important policy enforcement into PostgreSQL and guard against a slew of potential application programming errors (compared to handling all this enforcement in our application data access code)! Karl -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
