>> the table or even discover that it exists!
>               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Not in 6.3, or maybe ever.  Too much OO stuff for that, I think.

I vote for not ever. No commercial DBMS has it. It is a standard
that is of very restricted practicability. You can always split into
different 
databases whatever needs turbo security.

Andreas 

Tue, 24 Feb 1998 10:21:57 +0100
Zeugswetter Andreas SARZ <Andreas.Zeugswetter@telecom.at>
Re: [HACKERS] Here it is - view permissions
Andreas wrote:
>
> >> the table or even discover that it exists!
> >               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Not in 6.3, or maybe ever.  Too much OO stuff for that, I think.
>
> I vote for not ever. No commercial DBMS has it. It is a standard
> that is of very restricted practicability. You can always split into
> different
> databases whatever needs turbo security.

    I'm not quite sure if any commercial RDMBS does it. But since
    we don't have the ability to create multiple tables/views  of
    the  same  name  as  long  as the owner differs, I think it's
    better to stay as we  are.   As  long  as  PostgreSQL  cannot
    distinguish  tables  of  the  same name by a <user>.tablename
    syntax, it's better to let  them  know  what  tables  already
    exist.


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#======================================== jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #



Tue, 24 Feb 1998 11:09:32 +0100 (MET)
jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck)
Re: [HACKERS] Here it is - view permissions
> 
> Andreas wrote:
> >
> > >> the table or even discover that it exists!
> > >               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > Not in 6.3, or maybe ever.  Too much OO stuff for that, I think.
> >
> > I vote for not ever. No commercial DBMS has it. It is a standard
> > that is of very restricted practicability. You can always split into
> > different
> > databases whatever needs turbo security.
> 
>     I'm not quite sure if any commercial RDMBS does it. But since
>     we don't have the ability to create multiple tables/views  of
>     the  same  name  as  long  as the owner differs, I think it's
>     better to stay as we  are.   As  long  as  PostgreSQL  cannot
>     distinguish  tables  of  the  same name by a <user>.tablename
>     syntax, it's better to let  them  know  what  tables  already
>     exist.

I have NOT added this to the TODO list.

-- 
Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)

Tue, 24 Feb 1998 10:09:30 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Here it is - view permissions