--On Donnerstag, März 09, 2006 17:23:11 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
(BTW, there was some work being done on updatable views, but I think
it's stalled. I suspect the reason is that our current rule system
is just too odd to support updatable views reasonably. I've been
Jaime Casanova wrote:
On 3/9/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've
built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about
it.
I think you'll find that corner cases
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a
single-object (possibly updatable) view?
Not a whole lot actually. If we had updateable views, I'd suggest that
people change their create synonym syntax to create view.
One
Kris Jurka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One key difference would be that synonyms track schema updates, like
adding a column, to the referenced object that a view would not.
That raises a fairly interesting point, actually. What would you expect
to happen here:
CREATE TABLE foo ...;
On fös, 2006-03-10 at 16:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Kris Jurka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One key difference would be that synonyms track schema updates, like
adding a column, to the referenced object that a view would not.
That raises a fairly interesting point, actually. What would you
This email is a preliminary design for
the implementation of synonyms in PostgreSQL. Comments and suggestions are welcomed.
BACKGROUND
Synonyms are database objects which can
be used in place of their referenced object in SELECT, INSERT,
UPDATE, and DELETE SQL statements.
On 3/9/06, William ZHANG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or should we letDROP TABLE foo CASCADE;to drop the SYNONYMS depended on the table?
Yes, I don't see any reason not to allow a cascading table drop include synonyms that reference them.
Also need to add \d support for psql.
Yes. Thanks for adding
* Jonah H. Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
In addition, SYNONYMS do participate in ACLs and support GRANT/REVOKE for
table privileges. DROP TABLE and TRUNCATE cannot be used with synonyms.
I assume you actually mean owner-level rights cannot be used with
synonyms.
- Permission on a synonym
* Jonah H. Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On 3/9/06, William ZHANG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or should we let
DROP TABLE foo CASCADE;
to drop the SYNONYMS depended on the table?
Yes, I don't see any reason not to allow a cascading table drop include
synonyms that reference them.
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms in
PostgreSQL. Comments and suggestions are welcomed.
BACKGROUND
Synonyms are database objects which can be used in place of their
referenced object in SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE SQL
* Stephan Szabo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Stephen Frost wrote:
Should a non-cascade drop fail or just implicitly drop the synonyms?
I'm not sure which way I feel about this... Users with only 'select'
permissions on a given object can't currently create objects which
Jonah,
This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms in
PostgreSQL. Comments and suggestions are welcomed.
1) Is there a SQL standard for this?
2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a
single-object (possibly updatable) view?
--
--Josh
On 3/9/06, Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com wrote:
1) Is there a SQL standard for this?
Nope.
2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and asingle-object (possibly updatable) view?
Not a whole lot actually. If we had updateable views,
I'd suggest that people change their
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Josh Berkus wrote:
Jonah,
This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms in
PostgreSQL. Comments and suggestions are welcomed.
1) Is there a SQL standard for this?
2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a
On 3/9/06, Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I understood the synonym plan, aperson with select on the synonym but not on the referenced table wouldn'tbe able to select through the synonym, while if the view was created bysomeone with select a person with select on the view could select
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Josh Berkus wrote:
2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a
single-object (possibly updatable) view?
I think with the plan as described, the permissions handling is slightly
different from how we handle
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 04:42:43PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On 3/9/06, Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com wrote:
1) Is there a SQL standard for this?
Nope.
2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a
single-object (possibly updatable) view?
Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2006-03-09 kell 11:35, kirjutas Jonah H. Harris:
This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms
in PostgreSQL. Comments and suggestions are welcomed.
BACKGROUND
Synonyms are database objects which can be used in place of their
referenced
* elein ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 04:42:43PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
Not a whole lot actually. If we had updateable views, I'd suggest that
people
change their create synonym syntax to create view. However, it would take
substantially more work to
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Josh Berkus wrote:
2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a
single-object (possibly updatable) view?
I think with the plan as described, the permissions handling
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, the permissions handling would still be different between a view and
a synonym AFAICS even if we dropped separate permissions on synonyms, so I
don't think they're drop in replacements for each other even after
updatable views.
Agreed, but given
Tom,
(BTW, there was some work being done on updatable views, but I think
it's stalled. I suspect the reason is that our current rule system
is just too odd to support updatable views reasonably. I've been
wondering if an implementation based on allowing triggers on views
would be any more
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've
built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about
it.
I think you'll find that corner cases like inserts involving nextval()
don't work real well with a
On 3/9/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've
built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about
it.
I think you'll find that corner cases like inserts
24 matches
Mail list logo
