Re: Proposal for SYNONYMS
От | Stephan Szabo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal for SYNONYMS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20060309100242.W22711@megazone.bigpanda.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal for SYNONYMS (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proposal for SYNONYMS
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Jonah H. Harris (jonah.harris@gmail.com) wrote: > > On 3/9/06, William ZHANG <uniware@zedware.org> 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. > > 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 > depend on that object (such that dropping the object would then require > 'cascade'), can they? I think a user can create a view to a table they only have select on right now and that should prevent non-cascade drops as well.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: