On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> wrote: > Whoa, hang on. I think you're being a bit quick to dismiss that > example. Why shouldn't I want an upsert where the majority of the > table columns follow the usual "make it so" pattern of an upsert, but > there is also this kind of audit column to be maintained? Then I would > write something like > > INSERT INTO tbl (<some values>, 0) > ON CONFLICT UPDATE SET <same values>, mod_count=mod_count+1; > > The root of the problem is the way that you're proposing to combine > the RLS policies (using AND), which runs contrary to the way RLS > policies are usually combined (using OR), which is why this kind of > example fails -- RLS policies in general aren't intended to all be > true simultaneously.
In case I wasn't clear, I'm proposing that we AND together the already OR'd together UPDATE and INSERT quals. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
