> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org]On Behalf Of
> Constantin Teodorescu
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > But wouldn't be nice if PostgreSQL could offer a more elegant
> solution?
> >
> > Can't you do it with the normal GRANT/REVOKE access-control mechanism?
>
> No. It didn't worked, that was my first idea!
>
> > I'm pretty sure that for rules (views), the access rights for queries
> > issued within the rule are checked based on the owner of the rule, not
> > the user who invoked the rule. Triggers ought to work the same way,
> > though I haven't tried it. So you could make the trigger function and
> > the protected table owned by the same user, and then not grant write
> > permission on that table to anyone else.
>
> It seems it didn't work!
>
Hmm,it seems to work for views(rules) but it doesn't work for functions.
It should work for stored procedures,shouldn't it ?
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue@tpf.co.jp
