Set a role in a form?

To use a role in ISQL one issues a set role instruction before running some SQL. How can this be done before running a form? Please point me to the doc if it exists. Thanks.

FaaaQ wrote: > To use a role in ISQL one issues a set role instruction before running some > SQL. How can this be done before running a form? Please point me to the doc > if it exists. I don't think there's a way of doing that in any released version - unless you can create your own custom Perform runner and call an ESQL/C function at the very start of operations. In future, you (meaning your DBA) will be able to set a default role for you; that may or may not be the answer. ISQL documentation should be found at the IBM Informix Library: http://www.ibm.com/software/data/informix/library -- Jonathan Leffler #include <disclaimer.h> Email: jleffler@earthlink.net, jleffler@us.ibm.com Guardian of DBD::Informix v2003.04 -- http://dbi.perl.org/

Jonathan Leffler wrote: > FaaaQ wrote: > >> To use a role in ISQL one issues a set role instruction before running >> some SQL. How can this be done before running a form? Please point me to >> the doc if it exists. > > I don't think there's a way of doing that in any released version - > unless you can create your own custom Perform runner and call an > ESQL/C function at the very start of operations. In future, you > (meaning your DBA) will be able to set a default role for you; that > may or may not be the answer. > > ISQL documentation should be found at the IBM Informix Library: > > http://www.ibm.com/software/data/informix/library > > > Jonathan, I heard about the new possibility to set up a default role in 9.50. However I would be interested to know if it is possible to use the role concept in a distributed environment. This was a major restriction in the past. If you had set a role and then performed a distributed query, this role had no effect in the remote database. Only the individual rights of this user (or public) have been checked by informix. Does this restriction still exist ? Also I wonder why the XPS concept with the sysdbopen() stored procedure did not find it's way into 9.5. Now we have a default role, but we are still not able to specify a default isolation level. If you have a lot of mode ansi databases, then the default isolation level of repeatable read is real pain. Unfortunately some query tools are not able to switch this. So it would really be helpful to specify a default isolation level (i-spy is not an option). The same is true for the default locking mode. Some applications do not specify anything, so they run with "lock mode not wait" and will be broken because of locking issues. The ability to specify a default-lock-wait-mode would be helpful. For these issues the XPS sysdbopen() stored procedure would be a great help. And last but not least. It is also a real pain that it seems not to be possible to specify the dirty read isolation level for dbschema. If you are working in a production environment, you are always receiving locking conflicts on the system tables when running dbschema. So you are not able to dump the schema of a table or stored procedures. This should really not be a big issue for informix to fix this. It would be great if you would think about these points as feature requests for 9.60 (dbschema for 9.50 ??). Thank you. Best regards Eric -- IT-Consulting Herber Mobile: +49 177 2276895 *********************************************** Download the IFMX Database-Monitor for free at: http://www.herber-consulting.de/BusyBee ***********************************************