Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

RE: [INTERFACES] A question on triggers

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Constantin Teodorescu" <teo(at)flex(dot)ro>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Ed Loehr" <eloehr(at)austin(dot)rr(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Interfaces" <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: [INTERFACES] A question on triggers
Date: 2000-02-19 15:15:29
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org 
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org]On Behalf Of 
> Constantin Teodorescu
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > 
> > > But wouldn't be nice if PostgreSQL could offer a more elegant 
> solution?
> > 
> > Can't you do it with the normal GRANT/REVOKE access-control mechanism?
> No. It didn't worked, that was my first idea!
> > I'm pretty sure that for rules (views), the access rights for queries
> > issued within the rule are checked based on the owner of the rule, not
> > the user who invoked the rule.  Triggers ought to work the same way,
> > though I haven't tried it.  So you could make the trigger function and
> > the protected table owned by the same user, and then not grant write
> > permission on that table to anyone else.
> It seems it didn't work!

Hmm,it seems to work for views(rules) but it doesn't work for functions.
It should work for stored procedures,shouldn't it ?


Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Dave Del SignoreDate: 2000-02-19 19:25:08
Subject: JDBC - Numeric & Decimal handling in 6.5.3?
Previous:From: Martin KresseDate: 2000-02-18 23:31:05

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group