Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On 14 January 2015 at 13:29, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> One thing they could still leak is the number of times they got > >> called, and thus possibly the number of unseen rows. Now if the > >> expressions get constant-folded away that won't be an issue, but a > >> clever user can probably avoid that. > > > > Right now, EXPLAIN ANALYSE can be used to tell you the number of > > unseen rows. Is that something that people are concerned about, and > > are there any plans to change it? > > Interesting question. I don't know.
Wasn't this part of the "covert channel" discussion that took place way before RLS was committed? As I recall, it was argued that such covert channels are acceptable as long as their bandwidth is low. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
