On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 08:32:44PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 05:53:38PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 02:29:46PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > I agree with David G. Johnston's feedback on this. My draft didn't mention
> > > SECURITY DEFINER, because I consider it redundant from a user's perspective.
> > > If a function is SECURITY DEFINER, that always overrides other sources of user
> > > identity. No need to mention it each time.
> >
> > Well, if it is a SECURITY DEFINER function, it is not going to be run as
> > the user who is active at commit/execution time, so I think we have to
> > specify that.
>
> I came up with this text:
>
> Execute AFTER triggers as the role that was active when trigger
> events were queued
>
> Previously such triggers were run as the role that was active at
> trigger execution time (e.g., at COMMIT). This is significant
> for cases where the role is changed between queue time and
> transaction commit.
Item added to the incompatibilities section of the release notes.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
