|
Problem IT13537
|
Status: Closed |
DUBIOUS OR EXCESS SYSCOLAUTH ENTRIES FOR VIEW CONTAINING MATH EXPRESSIONS, FUNCTIONS OR ORDER BY
|
| product: |
INFORMIX SERVER / 5725A3900 / B70 - IDS 11.70 |
| Problem description: |
When using math expressions or functions on columns of
underlying
tables in a view definition, you'd see syscolauth entries that
normally aren't there after mere view creation. This even can
go
as far as more such syscolauth entries than there are columns in
the view and/or higher column numbers than those assigned to
view
columns.
E.g. when creating a two column view (colnos 1 and 2), you might
see syscolauth entries for colnos 2, 3 and 4 for this tabid.
oncheck -cc then would complain like this:
Validating syscolauth for database stores7
ISAM error: no record found.
ERROR: No column found for syscolauth record.
Grantor
Grantee informix
Tabid 144
Column number 3
Authorization SU
ISAM error: no record found.
ERROR: No column found for syscolauth record.
Grantor
Grantee informix
Tabid 144
Column number 4
Authorization SU |
| Problem Summary: |
****************************************************************
* USERS AFFECTED: *
* Users of 11.70.xC1 through 11.70.xC8. *
****************************************************************
* PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: *
* Creating a view may result in extra rows to be inserted in *
* syscolauth table under the following conditions: *
* - view contains complex expressions in its projection *
* column, e.g., OLAP functions, math functions, etc *
* - view has an ORDER BY clause, and at least some of the *
* ORDER BY columns (or expressions) are not present in the *
* projection clause *
****************************************************************
* RECOMMENDATION: *
* Update to IBM Informix Server 11.70.xC9 *
**************************************************************** |
| Local Fix: |
|
| Solution |
|
| Workaround |
not known / see Local fix |
| Timestamps |
Date - problem reported :
Date - problem closed :
Date - last modified :
| 01.02.2016
09.06.2017
09.06.2017 |
| Problem solved at the following versions (IBM BugInfos) |
11.70.xC9
|
| Problem solved according to the fixlist(s) of the following version(s) |
