On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:15:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
Uh, that seems like it adds extra complexity just for this single case.
Yeah. I've dropped the idea personally -- the suggestion that the table
owner can provide a SECURITY DEFINER procedure to
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
It looks to me like the asymmetry between CREATE TRIGGER and DROP
TRIGGER is actually required by SQL99, though, so changing it would
be a hard sell (unless SQL2003 fixes it?).
Comments anyone?
Why not say that TRUNCATE requires the same privilige as a DELETE
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
Uh, that seems like it adds extra complexity just for this single case.
Yeah. I've dropped the idea personally -- the suggestion that the table
owner can provide a SECURITY DEFINER procedure to do the TRUNCATE if he
wants to allow others to do it
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
Uh, that seems like it adds extra complexity just for this single case.
Yeah. I've dropped the idea personally -- the suggestion that the table
owner can provide a SECURITY DEFINER procedure to do the TRUNCATE if he
wants to
Keith Worthington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:15:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote
Yeah. I've dropped the idea personally -- the suggestion that the table
owner can provide a SECURITY DEFINER procedure to do the TRUNCATE if
he wants to allow others to do it seems to me to cover
Keith Worthington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have just discovered that I can speed up one of my functions by a factor of
600 by changing an unqualified DELETE to a TRUNCATE. Unfortunately, the
function is run by multiple users and I get the error message
TESTDB= TRUNCATE
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 14:00, Tom Lane wrote:
Keith Worthington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have just discovered that I can speed up one of my functions by a factor
of
600 by changing an unqualified DELETE to a TRUNCATE. Unfortunately, the
function is run by multiple users and I get the
The author doesn't mention why he got a 600x increase- perhaps he
bypassed the delete triggers which was OK for his situation. I don't
like the notion that an optimization requires additional
privileges...why not detect an unqualified delete and call truncate
instead IFF there are no delete
