On 28 August 2018 at 01:49, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2018-Aug-27, Ken Tanzer wrote: >> - In the scheme of things, is it a lot of work or not so much? > > Probably not much. > Yeah, it doesn't seem like it would be particularly difficult, but it would probably still be a reasonable amount of work to go round finding all the places in code that would need updating. I.e., I think it would be more mechanical work, than anything fundamentally challenging. On the face of it, it seems like it might be a reasonable thing to support, but I wonder, is this really just syntactic sugar for creating a security barrier view on top of the materialized view? When RLS was originally implemented, that same question was asked for tables, but the answer was "no" because RLS on a table gives you fine-grained (row-level) control over what data in the table can be modified as well as read, which a SB view doesn't give you. But for a MV view, that's not a consideration, so what would RLS on a MV actually give you? Regards, Dean
