Hi, Vicențiu!
On May 31, Vicențiu Ciorbaru wrote:
> > As you might've guessed from my comments above, I'd rather prefer to
> > use REVOKE instead of DENY, if we can make it to work (and to
> > explain how it works afterwards :).
> >
> > So here I suggest a semantics how REVOKE could be used for ne
Hi Sergey!
On Tue, 29 May 2018 at 17:54 Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Vicențiu!
As you might've guessed from my comments above, I'd rather prefer to use
> REVOKE instead of DENY, if we can make it to work (and to explain how it
> works afterwards :).
>
> So here I suggest a semantics how REVO
Hi, Vicențiu!
On May 12, Vicențiu Ciorbaru wrote:
> >
> > Random thoughts:
> >
> > * It's good that SQL Server supports DENY statement, a precedent is
> > a very strong argument for us to do it that way.
> >
> > * I wasn't able to find any other database that has this functionality.
> > (but many
Hi,
Thanks a lot for reviewing the approach. I'll surely update MDEV-14443 with
these ideas.
We could follow either of the two approaches mentioned by Vicentiu above
(argument for duplication of tables or modification of the primary key
definition for including an extra is_deny column to avoid dupl
Hi Sergei!
On Fri, 11 May 2018 at 21:10 Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Rutuja!
>
> I think it would've be useful to put your main ideas into MDEV-14443, as
> a comment.
>
> For now I've just added a link to your email.
>
> On May 09, Rutuja Surve wrote:
> > Hello,
> > Please find the proposal for
Hi, Rutuja!
I think it would've be useful to put your main ideas into MDEV-14443, as
a comment.
For now I've just added a link to your email.
On May 09, Rutuja Surve wrote:
> Hello,
> Please find the proposal for the Negative Grants project attached along
> with this e-mail. It would be great to
6 matches
Mail list logo
