|
# 43502
jjxlcsw
|
|
|
 To:
恭喜大师了。我老婆也快了
From: jjxlcsw
2007.08.13 01:25
|
|
|
|
|
# 43501
rocket_zhao
|
|
|
 To: eygle
祝贺你喜得贵子啊，责任大了啊，呵呵！
From: rocket_zhao
2007.08.12 20:02
|
|
|
|
|
# 43499
Chi
来自: mex
|
|
|
To: Eygle
Filicitan por su babe nuevo (-a)!
From: Chi
2007.08.10 09:03
|
|
|
|
|
# 43497
chi
来自: Mexico
|
|
|
To: Eygle
Reply my earlier post about the the MV.
Q2.I found both appear in table list too.
Q3.For other users, I created role accessing the MV as a table, then grant the role to other user to access the MV.
in term of Q1, still do not know why?
From: chi
2007.08.07 19:26
|
|
|
|
|
# 43496
CHi
来自: Mexico
|
|
|
To: Eygle
When I try to use another user to access the materialized view (mv) of my schema user, I found following status in all_objects
select object_name, object_type from all_objects where owner ='BAANDB' and object_name LIKE '%MV';
OBJECT_NAME OBJECT_TYPE
--------------- ------------------
R1_MV TABLE
R1_MV MATERIALIZED VIEW
T2_MV TABLE
T2_MV MATERIALIZED VIEW
However,I can not access both mv even I grant SELECT ANY TABLE to user. If I do desc T2_MV,I will get an error "object t2_mv does not exist".I only can access both mv by reference, ie. BAANDB.R1_MV (even before I granted).
My questions are
1. why the all_objects show both mv as type TABLE and MATERIALIZED VIEW.
2.How can user can access both mv without referencing? directly.
3.If the mv is a TABLE in principle, why can´t user access it?
From: CHi
2007.08.07 08:40
|
|
|
|
|
eygle.com
我要留言
To: 
回复
编辑
To: eygle
To: eygle