From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] function body actors (was: viewing source code)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:24:41 -0500
Message-ID: <20071221162441.GH10918@crankycanuck.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b42b73150712202109u26d05d01q4f1b8be8d29f763c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b42b73150712202109u26d05d01q4f1b8be8d29f763c@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 12:09:28AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Maybe a key management solution isn't required. If, instead of
> strictly wrapping a language with an encryption layer, we provide
> hooks (actors) that have the ability to operate on the function body
> when it arrives and leaves pg_proc, we may sidestep the key problem
> (leaving it to the user) and open up the doors to new functionality at
> the same time.
I like this idea much better, because the same basic mechanism can be used
for more than one thing, and it doesn't build in a system that is
fundamentally weak. Of course, you _can_ build a weak system this way, but
there's an important difference between building a fundamentally weak system
and making weak systems possible.
A
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: ajs@crankycanuck.ca
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] function body actors (was: viewing source code)
In-Reply-To: <20071221162441.GH10918@crankycanuck.ca>
* 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