[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/TEIID-5842?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin...
]
Steven Hawkins updated TEIID-5842:
----------------------------------
Description:
Right now tables/views, procedures, and functions are in separate namespaces. There are
three downsides
- procedural to relational mapping effectively puts procedures and tables in the same
namespace
- the default logic in the permission system does not check the resource type, so there is
an assumption that the names won't conflict.
- creating a virtual function defined by teiid procedure language (which we should be more
strict about) is represented in system metadata as a procedure, but is resolvable as a
function of the same name
We either need to put everything in the same namespace, or be more exacting with the
permission logic.
was:
Right now tables/views, procedures, and functions are in separate namespaces. There are
two downsides
- procedural to relational mapping effectively puts procedures and tables in the same
namespace
- the default logic in the permission system does not check the resource type, so there is
an assumption that the names won't conflict.
We either need to put everything in the same namespace, or be more exacting with the
permission logic.
Better define the schema object namespaces
------------------------------------------
Key: TEIID-5842
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/TEIID-5842
Project: Teiid
Issue Type: Quality Risk
Components: Query Engine
Reporter: Steven Hawkins
Assignee: Steven Hawkins
Priority: Major
Fix For: 13.0
Right now tables/views, procedures, and functions are in separate namespaces. There are
three downsides
- procedural to relational mapping effectively puts procedures and tables in the same
namespace
- the default logic in the permission system does not check the resource type, so there
is an assumption that the names won't conflict.
- creating a virtual function defined by teiid procedure language (which we should be
more strict about) is represented in system metadata as a procedure, but is resolvable as
a function of the same name
We either need to put everything in the same namespace, or be more exacting with the
permission logic.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)