Re: Another 11gr2 oddity...
From: Noons <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 22:06:48 +1000
Message-ID: <jshhcj$h8o$1_at_dont-email.me>
ddf wrote,on my timestamp of 28/06/2012 1:59 AM:
> For a long time now Oracle has hinted that RESOURCE was not the role
> to be granting to people and that explicit grants or other roles
> should be used. I suppose this is one way to prod people into
> creating their own general-purpose roles for basic privileges.
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 22:06:48 +1000
Message-ID: <jshhcj$h8o$1_at_dont-email.me>
ddf wrote,on my timestamp of 28/06/2012 1:59 AM:
>
> For a long time now Oracle has hinted that RESOURCE was not the role
> to be granting to people and that explicit grants or other roles
> should be used. I suppose this is one way to prod people into
> creating their own general-purpose roles for basic privileges.
Sure. But last time I looked, it's listed as a valid role in various of their own manuals. I don't give a hoot about "hints" until they make a show in the doco, black on white. Or else we might all start carrying weapons? This is just SLACK QA, quite frankly. And don't anyone please mention "doco error": that one is a classic... Received on Thu Jun 28 2012 - 07:06:48 CDT