On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 08:42:07AM -0400, Alex Pilosov wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Karel Zak wrote:
> This is a little bit better, but, results in following syntax:
> GRANT SELECT ON FOO(int4). I'm not sure if this really makes sense. Its
> not a select permission, its an execute permission on a function, and
And if we will have select permission for columns?
> should be handled when/where execute permission is checked.
>
> Its not hard to implement (just change what parser thinks relation is),
> but I'm sure will conflict with _something_.
>
> > IMHO very important is how add new feature and use it together with
> > old feature.
> >
> > > Once its possible to control permission to execute a function via GRANT,
> > > it solves the grant problem for function-as-tablesource
> >
> > The permissions system was an example only. If you add "foo()-tables"
> > as something what needs special usage and care you probably found more
> > problems. For example, what show command '\d' in the psql client, how
> > relation show pg_access ..etc?
> \df
And list of attributes of foo()?
> Its a function, not a relation. You can do a lot of things to a relation
> (such as define rules, triggers, constraints), which do not make any sense
Say with me: it isn't a function, its a function that returning records
and we will use it in same possition as standard table only. The other
usage donsn't exist for this.
I want wring out from foo()-tables most what is possible (like
permissions, rules, views). IMHO it's correct requirement :-)
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/
C, PostgreSQL, PHP, WWW, http://docs.linux.cz, http://mape.jcu.cz
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
