If an SRF in the FROM clause references a table having row-level
security policies, and we inline that SRF into the calling query,
we neglected to mark the plan as potentially dependent on which
role is executing it. This could lead to later executions in the
same session returning or hiding rows that should have been hidden
or returned instead.
Our thanks to Wolfgang Walther for reporting this problem.
Stephen Frost and Tom Lane
Security: CVE-2023-2455
The COPY documentation is quite clear that "COPY relation TO" copies
rows from only the named table, not any inheritance children it may
have. However, if you enabled row-level security on the table then
this stopped being true, because the code forgot to apply the ONLY
modifier in the "SELECT ... FROM relation" query that it constructs
in order to allow RLS predicates to be attached. Fix that.
Report and patch by Antonin Houska (comment adjustments and test case
by me). Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3472.1675251957@antos
Ordinarily, a pg_policy.polroles array wouldn't list the same role
more than once; but CREATE POLICY does not prevent that. If we
perform DROP OWNED BY on a role that is listed more than once,
RemoveRoleFromObjectPolicy either suffered an assertion failure
or encountered a tuple-updated-by-self error. Rewrite it to cope
correctly with duplicate entries, and add a CommandCounterIncrement
call to prevent the other problem.
Per discussion, there's other cleanup that ought to happen here,
but this seems like the minimum essential fix.
Per bug #17062 from Alexander Lakhin. It's been broken all along,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17062-11f471ae3199ca23@postgresql.org
Since WITH CHECK OPTION was introduced, ExecInitModifyTable has
initialized WCO expressions with the wrong plan node as parent -- that is,
it passed its input subplan not the ModifyTable node itself. Up to now
we thought this was harmless, but bug #16006 from Vinay Banakar shows it's
not: if the input node is a SubqueryScan then ExecInitWholeRowVar can get
confused into doing the wrong thing. (The fact that ExecInitWholeRowVar
contains such logic is certainly a horrid kluge that doesn't deserve to
live, but figuring out another way to do that is a task for some other day.)
Andres had already noticed the wrong-parent mistake and fixed it in commit
148e632c0, but not being aware of any user-visible consequences, he quite
reasonably didn't back-patch. This patch is simply a back-patch of
148e632c0, plus addition of a test case based on bug #16006. I also added
the test case to v12/HEAD, even though the bug is already fixed there.
Back-patch to all supported branches. 9.4 lacks RLS policies so the
new test case doesn't work there, but I'm pretty sure a test could be
devised based on using a whole-row Var in a plain WITH CHECK OPTION
condition. (I lack the cycles to do so myself, though.)
Andres Freund and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16006-99290d2e4642cbd5@postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181205225213.hiwa3kgoxeybqcqv@alap3.anarazel.de
In commit e2d4ef8de8, security checks were added to prevent
user-supplied operators from running over data from pg_statistic
unless the user has table or column privileges on the table, or the
operator is leakproof. For a table with RLS, however, checking for
table or column privileges is insufficient, since that does not
guarantee that the user has permission to view all of the column's
data.
Fix this by also checking for securityQuals on the RTE, and insisting
that the operator be leakproof if there are any. Thus the
leakproofness check will only be skipped if there are no securityQuals
and the user has table or column privileges on the table -- i.e., only
if we know that the user has access to all the data in the column.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Jonathan Katz and Stephen Frost.
Security: CVE-2019-10130
When accessing a table with RLS via a view, the RLS checks are
performed as the view owner. However, the code neglected to propagate
that to any subqueries in the RLS checks. Fix that by calling
setRuleCheckAsUser() for all RLS policy quals and withCheckOption
checks for RTEs with RLS.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
Per bug #15708 from daurnimator.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15708-d65cab2ce9b1717a@postgresql.org
A collection of typos I happened to spot while reading code, as well as
grepping for common mistakes.
Backpatch to all supported versions, as applicable, to avoid conflicts
when backporting other commits in the future.
This reverts commits d204ef6377,
83454e3c2b and a few more commits thereafter
(complete list at the end) related to MERGE feature.
While the feature was fully functional, with sufficient test coverage and
necessary documentation, it was felt that some parts of the executor and
parse-analyzer can use a different design and it wasn't possible to do that in
the available time. So it was decided to revert the patch for PG11 and retry
again in the future.
Thanks again to all reviewers and bug reporters.
List of commits reverted, in reverse chronological order:
f1464c5380 Improve parse representation for MERGE
ddb4158579 MERGE syntax diagram correction
530e69e59b Allow cpluspluscheck to pass by renaming variable
01b88b4df5 MERGE minor errata
3af7b2b0d4 MERGE fix variable warning in non-assert builds
a5d86181ec MERGE INSERT allows only one VALUES clause
4b2d44031f MERGE post-commit review
4923550c20 Tab completion for MERGE
aa3faa3c7a WITH support in MERGE
83454e3c2b New files for MERGE
d204ef6377 MERGE SQL Command following SQL:2016
Author: Pavan Deolasee
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier
MERGE performs actions that modify rows in the target table
using a source table or query. MERGE provides a single SQL
statement that can conditionally INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE rows
a task that would other require multiple PL statements.
e.g.
MERGE INTO target AS t
USING source AS s
ON t.tid = s.sid
WHEN MATCHED AND t.balance > s.delta THEN
UPDATE SET balance = t.balance - s.delta
WHEN MATCHED THEN
DELETE
WHEN NOT MATCHED AND s.delta > 0 THEN
INSERT VALUES (s.sid, s.delta)
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
DO NOTHING;
MERGE works with regular and partitioned tables, including
column and row security enforcement, as well as support for
row, statement and transition triggers.
MERGE is optimized for OLTP and is parameterizable, though
also useful for large scale ETL/ELT. MERGE is not intended
to be used in preference to existing single SQL commands
for INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE since there is some overhead.
MERGE can be used statically from PL/pgSQL.
MERGE does not yet support inheritance, write rules,
RETURNING clauses, updatable views or foreign tables.
MERGE follows SQL Standard per the most recent SQL:2016.
Includes full tests and documentation, including full
isolation tests to demonstrate the concurrent behavior.
This version written from scratch in 2017 by Simon Riggs,
using docs and tests originally written in 2009. Later work
from Pavan Deolasee has been both complex and deep, leaving
the lead author credit now in his hands.
Extensive discussion of concurrency from Peter Geoghegan,
with thanks for the time and effort contributed.
Various issues reported via sqlsmith by Andreas Seltenreich
Authors: Pavan Deolasee, Simon Riggs
Reviewer: Peter Geoghegan, Amit Langote, Tomas Vondra, Simon Riggs
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jKitBSrB7oTgT9CY2i1ObfOt36z0XMraQc+Xrz8QB0nXA@mail.gmail.comhttps://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkJdBuxj9PO=2QaO9-3h3xGbQPZ34kJH=HukRekwM-GZg@mail.gmail.com
The update path of an INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE requires SELECT
permission on the columns of the arbiter index, but it failed to check
for that in the case of an arbiter specified by constraint name.
In addition, for a table with row level security enabled, it failed to
check updated rows against the table's SELECT policies when the update
path was taken (regardless of how the arbiter index was specified).
Backpatch to 9.5 where ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE and RLS were introduced.
Security: CVE-2017-15099
DROP CASCADE doesn't currently promise to visit dependent objects in
a fixed order, so when the regression tests use it, we typically need
to suppress the details of which objects get dropped in order to have
predictable test output. Traditionally we've done that by setting
client_min_messages higher than NOTICE, but there's a better way:
we can "\set VERBOSITY terse" in psql. That suppresses the DETAIL
message with the object list, but we still get the basic notice telling
how many objects were dropped. So at least the test case can verify
that the expected number of objects were dropped.
The VERBOSITY method was already in use in a few places, but run
around and use it wherever it makes sense.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/10766.1501608885@sss.pgh.pa.us
ExecInitModifyTable() thought there was a plan per partition, but no,
there's only one. The problem had escaped detection so far because there
would only be visible misbehavior if there were a SubPlan (not an InitPlan)
in the quals being duplicated for each partition. However, valgrind
detected a bogus memory access in test cases added by commit 4f7a95be2,
and investigation of that led to discovery of the bug. The additional
test case added here crashes without the patch.
Patch by Amit Langote, test case by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/10974.1497227727@sss.pgh.pa.us
The new partitioned table capability added a new relkind, namely
RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE. Update fireRIRrules() to apply RLS
policies on RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE as it does RELKIND_RELATION.
In addition, add RLS regression test coverage for partitioned tables.
Issue raised by Fakhroutdinov Evgenievich and patch by Mike Palmiotto.
Regression test editorializing by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/flat/20170601065959.1486.69906@wrigleys.postgresql.org
A proposed patch, also by Thomas and in the same thread, would change
the output order of these. Independent of the follow-up patches
getting committed, nailing down the order in these specific tests at
worst seems harmless.
Author: Thomas Munro
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=1D4-tP7j7UAgT_j4ZX2j4Ehe1qgZQWFKBMb8F76UW5Rg@mail.gmail.com
We have had support for restrictive RLS policies since 9.5, but they
were only available through extensions which use the appropriate hooks.
This adds support into the grammer, catalog, psql and pg_dump for
restrictive RLS policies, thus reducing the cases where an extension is
necessary.
In passing, also move away from using "AND"d and "OR"d in comments.
As pointed out by Alvaro, it's not really appropriate to attempt
to make verbs out of "AND" and "OR", so reword those comments which
attempted to.
Reviewed By: Jeevan Chalke, Dean Rasheed
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20160901063404.GY4028@tamriel.snowman.net
Welsh (cy_GB) apparently sorts 'dd' after 'f', creating problems
analogous to the odd sorting of 'aa' in Danish. Adjust regression
test case to not use data that provokes that.
Jeff Janes
Patch: <CAMkU=1zx-pqcfSApL2pYDQurPOCfcYU0wJorsmY1OrYPiXRbLw@mail.gmail.com>
Some tests added in 9.5 depended on 'aa' sorting before 'bb', which
doesn't hold true in Danish. Use slightly different test data to
avoid the problem.
Jeff Janes
Report: <CAMkU=1w-cEDbA+XHdNb=YS_4wvZbs66Ni9KeSJKAJGNJyOsgQw@mail.gmail.com>
To avoid any possible overlap with existing roles on a system when
doing a 'make installcheck', use role names which start with
'regress_'.
Pointed out by Tom.
In the plancache, we check if the environment we planned the query under
has changed in a way which requires us to re-plan, such as when the user
for whom the plan was prepared changes and RLS is being used (and,
therefore, there may be different policies to apply).
Unfortunately, while those values were set and checked, they were not
being reset when the query was re-planned and therefore, in cases where
we change role, re-plan, and then change role again, we weren't
re-planning again. This leads to potentially incorrect policies being
applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query
is planned under one role and then executed under other roles, which
could happen under security definer functions or when a common user and
query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs.
Further, extensions which made use of CopyCachedPlan() may suffer from
similar issues as the RLS-related fields were not properly copied as
part of the plan and therefore RevalidateCachedQuery() would copy in the
current settings without invalidating the query.
Fix by using the same approach used for 'search_path', where we set the
correct values in CompleteCachedPlan(), check them early on in
RevalidateCachedQuery() and then properly reset them if re-planning.
Also, copy through the values during CopyCachedPlan().
Pointed out by Ashutosh Bapat. Reviewed by Michael Paquier.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
Security: CVE-2016-2193
Some time back we agreed that row_security=off should not be a way to
bypass RLS entirely, but only a way to get an error if it was being
applied. However, the code failed to act that way for table owners.
Per discussion, this is a must-fix bug for 9.5.0.
Adjust the logic in rls.c to behave as expected; also, modify the
error message to be more consistent with the new interpretation.
The regression tests need minor corrections as well. Also update
the comments about row_security in ddl.sgml to be correct. (The
official description of the GUC in config.sgml is already correct.)
I failed to resist the temptation to do some other very minor
cleanup as well, such as getting rid of a duplicate extern declaration.
Commit e5e11c8cc added a bunch of EXPLAIN statements without COSTS OFF
to the regression tests. This is contrary to project policy since it
results in unnecessary platform dependencies in the output (it's just
luck that we didn't get buildfarm failures from it). Per gripe from
Mike Wilson.
We carry around information about if a given query has row security or
not to allow the plancache to use that information to invalidate a
planned query in the event that the environment changes.
Previously, the flag of one of the subqueries was simply being copied
into place to indicate if the query overall included RLS components.
That's wrong as we need the global OR of all subqueries. Fix by
changing the code to match how fireRIRules works, which is results
in OR'ing all of the flags.
Noted by Tom.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
DROP OWNED BY handled GRANT-based ACLs but was not removing roles from
policies. Fix that by having DROP OWNED BY remove the role specified
from the list of roles the policy (or policies) apply to, or the entire
policy (or policies) if it only applied to the role specified.
As with ACLs, the DROP OWNED BY caller must have permission to modify
the policy or a WARNING is thrown and no change is made to the policy.
ALTER POLICY hadn't fully considered partial policy alternation
(eg: change just the roles on the policy, or just change one of
the expressions) when rebuilding the dependencies. Instead, it
would happily remove all dependencies which existed for the
policy and then only recreate the dependencies for the objects
referred to in the specific ALTER POLICY command.
Correct that by extracting and building the dependencies for all
objects referenced by the policy, regardless of if they were
provided as part of the ALTER POLICY command or were already in
place as part of the pre-existing policy.
During expand_security_quals, we take the security barrier quals on an
RTE and create a subquery which evaluates the quals. During this, we
have to replace any variables in the outer query which refer to the
original RTE with references to the columns from the subquery.
We need to also perform that replacement for any Vars in the
append_rel_list.
Only backpatching to 9.5 as we only go through this process in 9.4 for
auto-updatable security barrier views, which UNION ALL queries aren't.
Discovered by Haribabu Kommi
Patch by Dean Rasheed
This adds regressions tests which are specific to INSERT+RETURNING and
UPDATE+RETURNING to ensure that the SELECT policies are added as
WithCheckOptions (and should therefore throw an error when the policy is
violated).
Per suggestion from Andres.
Back-patch to 9.5 as the prior commit was.
To allow users to force RLS to always be applied, even for table owners,
add ALTER TABLE .. FORCE ROW LEVEL SECURITY.
row_security=off overrides FORCE ROW LEVEL SECURITY, to ensure pg_dump
output is complete (by default).
Also add SECURITY_NOFORCE_RLS context to avoid data corruption when
ALTER TABLE .. FORCE ROW SECURITY is being used. The
SECURITY_NOFORCE_RLS security context is used only during referential
integrity checks and is only considered in check_enable_rls() after we
have already checked that the current user is the owner of the relation
(which should always be the case during referential integrity checks).
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
Specifically, make its effect independent from the row_security GUC, and
make it affect permission checks pertinent to views the BYPASSRLS role
owns. The row_security GUC thereby ceases to change successful-query
behavior; it can only make a query fail with an error. Back-patch to
9.5, where BYPASSRLS was introduced.
To make sure that pg_dump/pg_restore function properly with RLS
policies, arrange to have a few of them left around at the end of the
regression tests.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
Every query of a single ENABLE ROW SECURITY table has two meanings, with
the row_security GUC selecting between them. With row_security=force
available, every function author would have been advised to either set
the GUC locally or test both meanings. Non-compliance would have
threatened reliability and, for SECURITY DEFINER functions, security.
Authors already face an obligation to account for search_path, and we
should not mimic that example. With this change, only BYPASSRLS roles
need exercise the aforementioned care. Back-patch to 9.5, where the
row_security GUC was introduced.
Since this narrows the domain of pg_db_role_setting.setconfig and
pg_proc.proconfig, one might bump catversion. A row_security=force
setting in one of those columns will elicit a clear message, so don't.
When retrieving policies, if not working on the root target relation,
we actually want the relation's SELECT policies, regardless of
the top level query command type. For example in UPDATE t1...FROM t2
we need to apply t1's UPDATE policies and t2's SELECT policies.
Previously top level query command type was applied to all relations,
which was wrong. Add some regression coverage to ensure we don't
violate this principle in the future.
Report and patch by Dean Rasheed. Cherry picked from larger refactoring
patch and tweaked by me. Back-patched to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
Policy USING and WITH CHECK expressions were using EXPR_KIND_WHERE for
parse analysis, which results in inappropriate ERROR messages when
the expression contains unsupported constructs such as aggregates.
Create a new ParseExprKind called EXPR_KIND_POLICY and tailor the
related messages to fit.
Reported by Noah Misch. Reviewed by Dean Rasheed, Alvaro Herrera,
and Robert Haas. Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
When DefineQueryRewrite() is about to convert a table to a view, it checks
the table for features unavailable to views. For example, it rejects tables
having triggers. It omits to reject tables having relrowsecurity or a
pg_policy record. Fix that. To faciliate the repair, invent
relation_has_policies() which indicates the presence of policies on a
relation even when row security is disabled for that relation.
Reported by Noah Misch. Patch by me, review by Stephen Frost. Back-patch
to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
CreatePolicy() and AlterPolicy() omit to create a pg_shdepend entry for
each role in the TO clause. Fix this by creating a new shared dependency
type called SHARED_DEPENDENCY_POLICY and assigning it to each role.
Reported by Noah Misch. Patch by me, reviewed by Alvaro Herrera.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
The pg_stats view is supposed to be restricted to only show rows
about tables the user can read. However, it sometimes can leak
information which could not otherwise be seen when row level security
is enabled. Fix that by not showing pg_stats rows to users that would
be subject to RLS on the table the row is related to. This is done
by creating/using the newly introduced SQL visible function,
row_security_active().
Along the way, clean up three call sites of check_enable_rls(). The second
argument of that function should only be specified as other than
InvalidOid when we are checking as a different user than the current one,
as in when querying through a view. These sites were passing GetUserId()
instead of InvalidOid, which can cause the function to return incorrect
results if the current user has the BYPASSRLS privilege and row_security
has been set to OFF.
Additionally fix a bug causing RI Trigger error messages to unintentionally
leak information when RLS is enabled, and other minor cleanup and
improvements. Also add WITH (security_barrier) to the definition of pg_stats.
Bumped CATVERSION due to new SQL functions and pg_stats view definition.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced. Reported by Yaroslav.
Patch by Joe Conway and Dean Rasheed with review and input by
Michael Paquier and Stephen Frost.
To avoid a race condition where the relation being COPY'd could be
changed into a view or otherwise modified, keep the original lock
on the relation. Further, fully qualify the relation when building
the query up.
Also remove the poorly thought-out Assert() and check the entire
relationOids list as, post-RLS, there can certainly be multiple
relations involved and the planner does not guarantee their ordering.
Per discussion with Noah and Andres.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method
API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without
specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can
implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable
thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will
pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural
language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level
support object needed is a single handler function identified by having
a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog
altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature.
Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments
(the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at
ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright
unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples.
Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable
within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more
honestly with methods that can't support that requirement.
Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix
assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as
failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering).
Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too.
Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API
in production.
UPDATE ... WHERE CURRENT OF would not work in conjunction with
RLS. Arrange to allow the CURRENT OF expression to be pushed down.
Issue noted by Peter Geoghegan. Patch by Dean Rasheed. Back patch
to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
As noted by Noah Misch, CreatePolicy() and AlterPolicy() omit to call
assign_expr_collations() on the node trees. Fix the omission and add
his test case to the rowsecurity regression test.
This reverts commit 5cdf25e168,
which was almost immediately proven insufficient by the buildfarm.
On second thought, the tables involved are not large enough that
autovacuum or autoanalyze would notice them; what seems far more
likely to be the culprit is the database-wide "vacuum analyze"
in the concurrent gist test. That thing has given us one headache
too many, so get rid of it in favor of targeted vacuuming of that
test's own tables only.
Some recent buildfarm failures can be explained by supposing that
autovacuum or autoanalyze fired on the tables created by this test,
resulting in plan changes. Do a proactive VACUUM ANALYZE on the
test's principal tables to try to forestall such changes.
Add a TABLESAMPLE clause to SELECT statements that allows
user to specify random BERNOULLI sampling or block level
SYSTEM sampling. Implementation allows for extensible
sampling functions to be written, using a standard API.
Basic version follows SQLStandard exactly. Usable
concrete use cases for the sampling API follow in later
commits.
Petr Jelinek
Reviewed by Michael Paquier and Simon Riggs
The newly added ON CONFLICT clause allows to specify an alternative to
raising a unique or exclusion constraint violation error when inserting.
ON CONFLICT refers to constraints that can either be specified using a
inference clause (by specifying the columns of a unique constraint) or
by naming a unique or exclusion constraint. DO NOTHING avoids the
constraint violation, without touching the pre-existing row. DO UPDATE
SET ... [WHERE ...] updates the pre-existing tuple, and has access to
both the tuple proposed for insertion and the existing tuple; the
optional WHERE clause can be used to prevent an update from being
executed. The UPDATE SET and WHERE clauses have access to the tuple
proposed for insertion using the "magic" EXCLUDED alias, and to the
pre-existing tuple using the table name or its alias.
This feature is often referred to as upsert.
This is implemented using a new infrastructure called "speculative
insertion". It is an optimistic variant of regular insertion that first
does a pre-check for existing tuples and then attempts an insert. If a
violating tuple was inserted concurrently, the speculatively inserted
tuple is deleted and a new attempt is made. If the pre-check finds a
matching tuple the alternative DO NOTHING or DO UPDATE action is taken.
If the insertion succeeds without detecting a conflict, the tuple is
deemed inserted.
To handle the possible ambiguity between the excluded alias and a table
named excluded, and for convenience with long relation names, INSERT
INTO now can alias its target table.
Bumps catversion as stored rules change.
Author: Peter Geoghegan, with significant contributions from Heikki
Linnakangas and Andres Freund. Testing infrastructure by Jeff Janes.
Reviewed-By: Heikki Linnakangas, Andres Freund, Robert Haas, Simon Riggs,
Dean Rasheed, Stephen Frost and many others.
The original security barrier view implementation, on which RLS is
built, prevented all non-leakproof functions from being pushed down to
below the view, even when the function was not receiving any data from
the view. This optimization improves on that situation by, instead of
checking strictly for non-leakproof functions, it checks for Vars being
passed to non-leakproof functions and allows functions which do not
accept arguments or whose arguments are not from the current query level
(eg: constants can be particularly useful) to be pushed down.
As discussed, this does mean that a function which is pushed down might
gain some idea that there are rows meeting a certain criteria based on
the number of times the function is called, but this isn't a
particularly new issue and the documentation in rules.sgml already
addressed similar covert-channel risks. That documentation is updated
to reflect that non-leakproof functions may be pushed down now, if
they meet the above-described criteria.
Author: Dean Rasheed, with a bit of rework to make things clearer,
along with comment and documentation updates from me.
The RLS capability is built on top of the WITH CHECK OPTION
system which was added for auto-updatable views, however, unlike
WCOs on views (which are mandated by the SQL spec to not fire until
after all other constraints and checks are done), it makes much more
sense for RLS checks to happen earlier than constraint and uniqueness
checks.
This patch reworks the structure which holds the WCOs a bit to be
explicitly either VIEW or RLS checks and the RLS-related checks are
done prior to the constraint and uniqueness checks. This also allows
better error reporting as we are now reporting when a violation is due
to a WITH CHECK OPTION and when it's due to an RLS policy violation,
which was independently noted by Craig Ringer as being confusing.
The documentation is also updated to include a paragraph about when RLS
WITH CHECK handling is performed, as there have been a number of
questions regarding that and the documentation was previously silent on
the matter.
Author: Dean Rasheed, with some kabitzing and comment changes by me.
