| From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hiroshi Inoue <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Mark Cave-Ayland <mark(dot)cave-ayland(at)ilande(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal for new pgsqlODBC feature - hiding tables inaccessible to the current user |
| Date: | 2007-06-28 15:54:11 |
| Message-ID: | 4683D9A3.7010307@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 09:01 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>>
>>> How about changing the default behavior of SQLTables to list only
>>> SELECTable tables and add a bit to Extra Opts to list inaccessible
>>> tables also ?
>> I think this would risk breaking a lot of existing applications.
>
> Really ?
> I can hardly imagine the applications which would update/delete
> the rows whose contents couldn't be seen.
insert-only audit tables?
Yes, they should really be handled by server-side triggers, but I know
of at least a couple of apps running on PostgreSQL with psqlODBC that do
it client side.
Regards, Dave
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Cave-Ayland | 2007-06-28 17:16:02 | Re: Proposal for new pgsqlODBC feature - hiding tables inaccessible to the current user |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2007-06-28 15:31:06 | Re: Proposal for new pgsqlODBC feature - hiding tables inaccessible to the current user |