Write ACL for sys_user_grmember table

[Alon Grod]

Why Im getting 101 matching conditions and not only one? What am I doing wrong?

 

 

[Dr Atul G- LNG]

Hi @Alon Grod 

Surprise, I tried the same and I can see 401 records 😞 

[Sandeep Rajput]

@Alon Grod the count of 101 shows on the screen because the count depends on the conditions configured in the condition field. Since there are no conditions at the moment, it is showing 101 records (it is an indication that your sys_user_grmember table contains 101 records). 

Record count is only dependent on the conditions configured within condition field and it has no relation with the script configured in the script field.

Also, please configure your ACL as follows via conditions and you would no longer need to write the script, only conditions would suffice in this case.

[Alon Grod]

@Sandeep Rajput the goal is :

if(current.group.manager == gs.getUserID() || gs.hasRole('local_manager'))
{
  answer = true;
}

is there anyway to achieve these two conditions without a script?

[Sandeep Rajput]

@Alon Grod First part current.group.manager == gs.getUserID() can be replaced via the condition I shared before, but for the second part gs.hasRole('local_manager')) you will need scripting (if you choose to combine both of these conditions in a single ACL).

However, if you are open to create two ACLs then in your first ACL, you can have the following condition.

And in the second ACL you can specify the role local_manager in the role list.

The advantage of having these two ACLs is that you do not have to run any script (which has a performance impact as script evaluation takes more time) and both the group manager and user with local_manager will have access to the Group Member table via separate ACLs.