> Is this possible? Or is it already being done?
> <a lot snipped>
> > > > How do you assign function to your objects?
> > I don't know if tying functions to classes has been added
> > to the TO-DO list. You may want to post to the hacker list and
> > suggest
> > it.
> Access to the function would then be gained by calling them through the
> class. (i.e. select EMP.totalPeople();, or update CORPEMP set
> CORPEMP.totals = DIVEMP.totalPeople();)
> Just an OO thought. (*ahhhh* It's that concurrency/data-hiding/coupling
> thing again.)
> Then one could disallow select/update on a table but all execute on
> specific functions. I do realize that this can be accomplished through
> triggers, but this has other potentials...
Currently, we don't have ACL's on functions. But at least for
the ones called by ExecMakeFunctionResult(), this really
makes sense as soon as we implement a uid/euid model for
The uid/euid for functions, triggers and views is already on
my personal TODO and I hope to make it for 6.4, so we can
offer view and function/trigger creation (restricted to
trusted languages) to ordinary users.
When adding ACL's to functions, I think the ACL's at all
should be moved into a separate catalog, containing the Oid,
owner and the ACL.
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter T Mount||Date: 1998-03-17 07:30:47|
|Subject: Re: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field|
|Previous:||From: Peter T Mount||Date: 1998-03-17 07:14:18|
|Subject: Re: Problem with JDBC interface in Postgresql-6.3|