X-Original-To: pgsql-interfaces-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C803E9DC9CE
	for <pgsql-interfaces-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:04:24 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 23865-01
	for <pgsql-interfaces-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:04:24 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from smtp2.actcom.co.il (smtp2.actcom.co.il [192.114.47.35])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FAAC9DC9AE
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:04:21 -0400 (AST)
Received: from perpetual.jerusalem.plus.com
	(l192-114-46-179.broadband.actcom.net.il [192.114.46.179])
	by smtp2.actcom.co.il (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jBF74DR2027031
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:04:18 +0200
Received: from daniel (helo=localhost)
	by perpetual.jerusalem.plus.com with local-esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1EmnXD-0001Ay-Fk; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:28:15 +0200
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:28:15 +0200 (IST)
From: Daniel Ariel <pgsqlinterfaces@netzach.co.il>
X-X-Sender: daniel@perpetual.jerusalem.plus.com
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Obtaining information on the schema of tables which
In-Reply-To: <22357.1134583686@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0512150920040.3946@perpetual.jerusalem.plus.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0512122253330.25426@perpetual.jerusalem.plus.com>
	<20051214173955.GA9238@wolff.to> <22357.1134583686@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 required=5 tests=[none]
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200512/22
X-Sequence-Number: 5890

> I think what he was complaining about was that information_schema
> restricts access to many things unless you are the table owner.
> This is per SQL99, but SQL2003 seems to have relaxed the rules to
> allow you to see info about tables you can access (ie, have nonzero
> rights for).  Updating the information_schema to follow the SQL2003
> rules is on the to-do list, but I dunno if anyone is actively working
> on it.  (Peter?)

Tom's interpretation is correct.

Is the required work to update to SQL2003 merely an update of the SQL of
the views in information_schema ? If it would expedite matters I would
be willing to help modify the SQL accordingly.

Daniel