From: | Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Mike Nolan <nolan(at)gw(dot)tssi(dot)com> |
Cc: | jjeffman(at)cpovo(dot)net, Postgresql-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: table synonyms |
Date: | 2005-05-24 16:39:29 |
Message-ID: | 1116952770.6139.21.camel@Andrea.peacock.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Am Dienstag, den 24.05.2005, 10:37 -0500 schrieb Mike Nolan:
> > > I hope anybody can help me on this subject. The problem is not to find
> > > a substitute for the Oracle synonyms, but a way to write queries
> > > which, reliably, can be used no matter the schema which owns the
> > > tables.
> >
> > Maybe you use views?
>
> Unless it changed in 8, you can't insert into or update a view.
>
> I don't know if rules will do the trick or not, to be honest I haven't
> figured out what they can and cannot do.
Yes, since views are basically constructed via rules, you can extend
them with rules for update, insert etc. as well.
> As someone who used to use synonyms at the user/schema level in Oracle
> as a way to restrict access to a subset tables based on user-specific
> criteria (eg, restricting salesman 'X' to only his accounts in the customer
> master table), yes, synonyms would be nice.
Views I'd say. Or you do it via SRF (set returning functions)
to isolate access.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | jjeffman | 2005-05-24 16:49:40 | Re: table synonyms |
Previous Message | Marc Soleda | 2005-05-24 16:18:46 | pg_autovacuum WinXP service |