| From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Keith Worthington <KeithW(at)NarrowPathInc(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Novice <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: can't set sequence |
| Date: | 2004-12-12 03:22:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20041212032204.GA43761@winnie.fuhr.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-novice |
On Sat, Dec 11, 2004 at 10:09:10PM -0500, Keith Worthington wrote:
> Exactly what I needed. Thank you. I didn't realize that a sequence
> carried a set of permissions separate from that of the column/table to
> which it was attached.
Yep. Here's a thread I started a couple of months ago proposing
that table permissions cascade to their implicit sequences:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2004-10/msg00511.php
Tom Lane raised some implementation concerns:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2004-10/msg00554.php
--
Michael Fuhr
http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2004-12-13 02:09:13 | Re: how to create a composite type as return type for a |
| Previous Message | Keith Worthington | 2004-12-12 03:09:10 | Re: can't set sequence |