Re:

Ooops.  I have to withdraw that comment.  I spent hours the other day
beating my head against the wall over this.  I was sure that it didn't
work . . .

Sorry,

----------------------------------------------------------------
Travis Bauer | CS Grad Student | IU |www.cs.indiana.edu/~trbauer
----------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 24 May 2000, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:

> On Wed, May 24, 2000 at 12:45:59PM -0500, Travis Bauer wrote:
> > One problem you may have with this is that if a function accesses some
> > table, the user who uses that function must also have permissions on the
> > table.  I have a similar problem.  I'd like to give permissions on a view,
> > but not on the table underlying the view (the view serves to filter out
> > some records the user shouldn't see).  I can't give permission to use view
> > without giving permission to use the table.
>
> Have you tried it? This is one of the things views are for. The view
> accesses it's underlying tables as the user who created the view, as far
> as I recall. I, for example, have an entire database where every table
> has a 'pub' boolean. I've created views that return only rows with pub =
> 't', and given the anonymous user (which the web server connect as)
> select privileges only on the view.
>