From: Färber, Franz-Josef (StMUK) <Franz-Josef.Faerber@stmuk.bayern.de>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Cc: Haupt, Matthias (StMUK) <Matthias.Haupt@stmuk.bayern.de>
Subject: AW: Why is materialized view creation a "security-restricted operation"?
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2026 11:36:48 +0000
Message-ID: <5628a96712e14b9fac594b34b0eb9161@stmuk.bayern.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d7467aa0ee958343fca8c6bd6720952b5bc08b1.camel@cybertec.at>
References: <77826d7580a9488ca28eb4bcfe94aa37@stmuk.bayern.de>
<2e9d29c1513afb47d652387ea5299076ef24adce.camel@cybertec.at>
<f69b47dbbe374bac8088887c21193f26@stmuk.bayern.de>
<4d7467aa0ee958343fca8c6bd6720952b5bc08b1.camel@cybertec.at>
>> [rant about PostgreSQL security restrictions]
No no no, not about security restrictions. The rant is about lacking orthogonality. About often NOT being able to combine language features. Doesn't anybody share that view? We COULD do better, I think.
> If the security restrictions of materialized views prevent you from using them, why don't you use a normal table instead, TRUNCATE it and INSERT into it?
The MAT VIEW is used from "outside". From other views, or from a client that connects to the database.
* I can replace it with a view; I didn't do that for performance reasons.
* I can replace it with a persistent table, a stored procedure, and custom caching logic. That'll work. But this is what a MAT VIEW is for, I thought.
Regards,
Franz-Josef Färber
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Oktober 2026 13:06
An: Färber, Franz-Josef (StMUK) <Franz-Josef.Faerber@stmuk.bayern.de>; Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Cc: Haupt, Matthias (StMUK) <Matthias.Haupt@stmuk.bayern.de>
Betreff: Re: Why is materialized view creation a "security-restricted operation"?
On Mon, 2026-10-12 at 14:59 +0000, Färber, Franz-Josef (StMUK) wrote:
> [rant about PostgreSQL security restrictions]
>
> Ok, I think some people get the point that I claim SQL / Postgres is
> lacking modularity / orthogonality in the way as I tried to define above.
I don't. Just because the features you are stacking don't work the way you'd like them to, it's not a shortcoming of orthogonality or modularity.
> So let me explain. And perhaps somebody can give good advice.
>
> * I am running Postgres in a container.
> * I am using https://github.com/pramsey/pgsql-http to query REST services using credentials.
> * I took it as good advice to pass environment variables into the container, and to pass
> passwords as single files, in mounted container directory /run/secrets/ .
> * Inside postgres I am trying to load that data, using memoization pattern. For example using
> CREATE TEMP TABLE x ...; COPY x ... FROM PROGRAM 'cat /run/secrets/mypassword'.
> This part is encapsulated as a function.
>
> * Now there was one point where I was using a MATERIALIZED VIEW accessing that function.
> And well, that failed.
>
> What I COULD do is replace COPY x ... FROM PROGRAM with a file_fdw
> FOREIGN TABLE, but this way it isn't parametrizable. I would have to
> create as many foreign tables as I have passwords / environment variables, I think.
If the security restrictions of materialized views prevent you from using them, why don't you use a normal table instead, TRUNCATE it and INSERT into it?
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Cc: Franz-Josef.Faerber@stmuk.bayern.de, laurenz.albe@cybertec.at, adrian.klaver@aklaver.com, Matthias.Haupt@stmuk.bayern.de
Subject: Re: AW: Why is materialized view creation a "security-restricted operation"?
In-Reply-To: <5628a96712e14b9fac594b34b0eb9161@stmuk.bayern.de>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox