Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E6702E3B4F for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:47:58 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 41670-03 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:47:53 -0400 (AST) Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.177]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD2882E3B1C for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:47:54 -0400 (AST) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m38so5723743waf.5 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:47:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=rSCnJh9rkjYbhb4nER+kqyv/AzIKNyw1Ei0RRY+uY1Q=; b=WN2ucFPobtR+0skJCQTKLP/FKSwgUtoF+KfPXTqpiewT7KQpYuamjdAbKnz8DBSWBZ+mUiOYaUYMvbiR/NIUqb7OlHJ5a3WMqmAvEbjMDdJkdQLvrot3bqcX7fKBuO1lboHdW/ACzrqrpKdCnB9aU6zeI3Ax5tf744AFSrlnaGo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=i4eOYoYnCg+0BzdEbDgi67EdTnyV4gvM7O95qFwgs7vadL+ZeI9ydsWU95ubglvh+7hav7X1OewgU3qimJQv6zAAF1f1cLTmg+F2oWKnmXJluuYDEhYKYxuO/oZwPQFdDsYL9C1bgMSTghMOuDqO/1Xja93vE4xua9837HMXDS0= Received: by 10.114.204.7 with SMTP id b7mr320650wag.124.1198176473402; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:47:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.76.15 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:47:53 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <90bce5730712201047m4dd0fe05k6b1fccc57897326f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:47:53 -0800 From: "Trevor Talbot" To: "Joshua D. Drake" Subject: Re: viewing source code Cc: "Roberts, Jon" , "Kris Jurka" , "Merlin Moncure" , "Jonah H. Harris" , "Bill Moran" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <476A9ADF.5030101@commandprompt.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1A6E6D554222284AB25ABE3229A92762112A33@nrtexcus702.int.asurion.com> <476A9ADF.5030101@commandprompt.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200712/315 X-Sequence-Number: 28131 On 12/20/07, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Roberts, Jon wrote: > > This really is a needed feature to make PostgreSQL more attractive to > > businesses. A more robust security model that better follows commercial > > products is needed for adoption. > I would argue that commercial products need to get a clue and stop > playing bondage with their users to help stop their imminent and frankly > obvious downfall from the Open Source competition. I'm still not seeing where your comments are actually coming from, and I can't decipher your argument as a result. Exactly what is it about fine-grained security controls that is "playing bondage with their users"? > This "feature" as it is called can be developed externally and has zero > reason to exist within PostgreSQL. If the feature has the level of > demand that people think that it does, then the external project will be > very successful and that's cool. I'm unsure of what you consider "external" here. Is SE-PostgreSQL the type of thing you mean?