Column-level constraints on updating
From: Garrett Fitzgerald (gfitzger@nyx.net)
Date: 10/08/02
- Next message: Barry Schwartz: "Re: Linked servers"
- Previous message: Kimberly L. Tripp: "Re: changing role owner"
- Next in thread: BP Margolin: "Re: Column-level constraints on updating"
- Reply: BP Margolin: "Re: Column-level constraints on updating"
- Reply: Mike John: "Re: Column-level constraints on updating"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Garrett Fitzgerald <gfitzger@nyx.net> Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 23:33:45 -0700
I have a scenario where I would like different users to be able to update
different columns in a table. A top-level user would be able to update all
columns: a bottom-level user would be able to see all columns, but only
update a couple.
When I assigned column-level security to the table, any updates that
included the forbidden column did not go through at all. So, I googled a
bit, and came up with the solution of using the IS_MEMBER function in an
UPDATE trigger to replace the fields that shouldn't be touched with the
value from the deleted table. This seemed to work quite well, assuming that
I don't want the user to know that her update "only partially succeeded".
Is there a middle ground, where I can tell the user that some of the fields
didn't change, but I allow the valid changes to go through? Thanks.
- Next message: Barry Schwartz: "Re: Linked servers"
- Previous message: Kimberly L. Tripp: "Re: changing role owner"
- Next in thread: BP Margolin: "Re: Column-level constraints on updating"
- Reply: BP Margolin: "Re: Column-level constraints on updating"
- Reply: Mike John: "Re: Column-level constraints on updating"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]