On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:50 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Boycott Tech Forums
> wrote:
>> I am a Sr. Software Engineer in USA who (like many others) have been
>> unfairly treated with offshore software engineers who have the audacity to
>> take our jobs, yet ask (mos
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:11 AM, Stephan Szabo
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, Michael B Allen wrote:
>
>> Please consider the following SQL
>>
>> SELECT e.eid, e.name
>> FROM entry e, access a
>> WHERE e.eid = 120
>> AND (e.ownid = 66 OR e.
T it works fine but it just does not feel right. I'm
worried that as the number of links increases (there could be
thousands) performance be negatively affected.
Mike
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:27 AM, Michael B Allen wrote:
>> Please consider the following SQL
>>
>>
T but that seems like an improper
usage of DISTINCT here.
Is there an alternative way to write this query? I only want to select
from the access table for the purpose of constraining by aid.
Mike
--
Michael B Allen
Java Active Directory Integration
http://www.ioplex.com/
--
Sent via pgsql-sql ma
nice if I could avoid the DISTINCT so that
the access check is isolated to the WHERE clause. Is there an
expression that means "if x matches any one of the following values"?
Mike
--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
ng the access check in
loop within the application.
Can anyone suggest a superior method?
Or any other ideas regarding implementing ACLs in SQL would be greatly
appreciated.
Mike
--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
