Pierre Girard wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >I have applied your patch with only minor comment additions. Let us
> >know if additional changes are required. Thanks.
> >
> >Are these flags required to be supplied to configure, or just the ASM
> >file?
> >
> > -Xa -xtarget=opteron -xarch=
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Pierre Girard wrote:
>> MAKE=gmake CC=/opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc CFLAGS="-xO3 -mt -fsimple=1
>> -ftrap=%none -nofstore -xbuiltin=%all -xlibmil -xlibmopt
>> -xtarget=opteron -xarch=amd64 -xregs=no%frameptr"
>> CXX=/opt/SUNWspro/bin/CC CXXFLAGS="-xO3 -mt -fsimple=1 -ftrap=%none
Pierre Girard wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >>MAKE=gmake CC=/opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc CFLAGS="-xO3 -mt -fsimple=1
> >>-ftrap=%none -nofstore -xbuiltin=%all -xlibmil -xlibmopt
> >>-xtarget=opteron -xarch=amd64 -xregs=no%frameptr"
> >>CXX=/opt/SUNWspro/bin/CC CXXFLAGS="-xO3 -mt -fsimple=1 -ftrap=%
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Just got tripped up by this:
>
> GRANT SELECT ON table1 TO someuser;
> GRANT SELECT ON table1_id_seq TO someuser;
> both work
>
> However,
> GRANT SELECT ON TABLE table1 TO someuser;
> ... works, while
> GRANT SELECT ON SEQUENCE table1_id_seq TO someuse
Bruce Momjian writes:
> The following patch allows VIEW and SEQUENCE for GRANT. I didn't add
> checks for relkind, figuring it wasn't worth it, right?
The permissions for a sequence aren't the same as they are for a table.
We've sort of ignored the point to date, but if we're going to add
specia
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > The following patch allows VIEW and SEQUENCE for GRANT. I didn't add
> > checks for relkind, figuring it wasn't worth it, right?
>
> The permissions for a sequence aren't the same as they are for a table.
> We've sort of ignored the point to date, but
Bruce, Tom,
> > The permissions for a sequence aren't the same as they are for a
> > table. We've sort of ignored the point to date, but if we're going to
> > add special syntax for granting on a sequence, I don't think we should
> > continue to ignore it.
>
> Uh, how are they different? You mea
Bruce Momjian wrote:
The following patch allows VIEW and SEQUENCE for GRANT. I didn't add
checks for relkind, figuring it wasn't worth it, right?
I think checking the relkind is pretty reasonable, and should require
only a few lines of code -- why not do it?
-Neil
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/plpgsql-trigger.html
example 36-4 has a race condition in the code that checks to see if a
row exists. It should use the code from example 36-1. This patch fixes
that. It also adds some commands to show what the summary table output
looks like. Unfortun
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/plpgsql-trigger.html
example 36-4 has a race condition in the code that checks to see if a
row exists. It should use the code from example 36-1. This patch fixes
that. It also adds some commands to show what the summary table outpu
Josh Berkus writes:
>> Uh, how are they different? You mean just UPDATE and none of the
>> others do anything?
> Yes, it would be nice to have real permissions for sequences, specifically
> USE (which allows nextval() and currval()) and UPDATE (which would allow
> setval() ). However, I don
Dear Bruce san.
I receive an inquiry from a user frequently. Where is it about a home
directory in a place? Then, In offer of the initial state of Windows,
the place is hidden and is not visible to a user. I considered what can
be offered this way and that. Then, using pg_config thinks that it
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:00:34PM +1300, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> However, I think the actual change is not quite right - after running
DOH! It would be good if doc/src had a better mechanism for handling
code; one that would allow for writing the code natively (so you don't
have to worry about tr
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:00:34PM +1300, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
However, I think the actual change is not quite right - after running
DOH! It would be good if doc/src had a better mechanism for handling
code; one that would allow for writing the code natively (so you don't
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 11:44:24 -0800,
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce, Tom,
>
> > > The permissions for a sequence aren't the same as they are for a
> > > table. We've sort of ignored the point to date, but if we're going to
> > > add special syntax for granting on a sequence, I don't think we sho
15 matches
Mail list logo
