Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Snowflake ADA-C01 Exam - Topic 4 Question 46 Discussion

Actual exam question for Snowflake's ADA-C01 exam
Question #: 46
Topic #: 4
[All ADA-C01 Questions]

The following SQL command was executed:

Use role SECURITYADMIN;

Grant ownership

On future tables

In schema PROD. WORKING

To role PROD_WORKING_OWNER;

Grant role PROD_WORKING_OWNER to role SYSADMIN;

Use role ACCOUNTADMIN;

Create table PROD.WORKING.XYZ (value number) ;

Which role(s) can alter or drop table XYZ?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

According to the GRANT OWNERSHIP documentation, the ownership privilege grants full control over the table and can only be held by one role at a time. However, the current owner can also grant the ownership privilege to another role, which transfers the ownership to the new role. In this case, the SECURITYADMIN role granted the ownership privilege on future tables in the PROD.WORKING schema to the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role. This means that any table created in that schema after the grant statement will be owned by the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role. Therefore, the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role can alter or drop table XYZ, which was created by the ACCOUNTADMIN role in the PROD.WORKING schema. Additionally, the ACCOUNTADMIN role can also alter or drop table XYZ, because it is the top-level role that has all privileges on all objects in the account. Furthermore, the SYSADMIN role can also alter or drop table XYZ, because it was granted the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role by the SECURITYADMIN role. The SYSADMIN role can activate the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role and inherit its privileges, including the ownership privilege on table XYZ. The SECURITYADMIN role cannot alter or drop table XYZ, because it does not have the ownership privilege on the table, nor does it have the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Wilbert
3 days ago
A is definitely wrong; ownership changes everything!
upvoted 0 times
...
Mabelle
8 days ago
I thought only ACCOUNTADMIN could do that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billye
13 days ago
Wait, can SYSADMIN really alter it? Seems odd.
upvoted 0 times
...
Fabiola
18 days ago
Totally agree with C! Makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashaunda
24 days ago
I think it's C, since PROD_WORKING_OWNER was granted ownership.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clorinda
29 days ago
C is the way to go. The PROD_WORKING_OWNER role was granted ownership, and the ACCOUNTADMIN and SYSADMIN roles have broad permissions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delila
2 months ago
D is the right answer. The question clearly states that the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role was granted ownership of the table, so only they can alter or drop it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Xochitl
2 months ago
B seems like the correct answer. The SECURITYADMIN, SYSADMIN, and ACCOUNTADMIN roles all have the necessary permissions to manage the table.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pete
2 months ago
I think the answer is C. The PROD_WORKING_OWNER role was granted ownership of future tables in the PROD.WORKING schema, so they should be able to alter or drop the XYZ table.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aleisha
2 months ago
I feel like the PROD_WORKING_OWNER should definitely have some control since it was granted ownership, but I can't recall if ACCOUNTADMIN overrides that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tresa
2 months ago
I'm a bit unsure about the hierarchy of roles. Does SYSADMIN have any special permissions that might let it alter the table too?
upvoted 0 times
...
Catherin
3 months ago
I think I saw a similar question where roles were granted ownership, and it allowed those roles to manage the tables. Could it be C?
upvoted 0 times
...
Janella
3 months ago
I remember that the role that creates a table usually has the ability to alter or drop it, so maybe it's just ACCOUNTADMIN?
upvoted 0 times
...
Whitley
3 months ago
This is a tricky one, but I think I've got it. The key is that the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role was granted ownership on future tables in that schema, and the SYSADMIN role was given that role. So C seems like the right answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elvera
3 months ago
I've got a good feeling about C. The PROD_WORKING_OWNER role was granted ownership, and the SYSADMIN role was given that role, so they should be able to alter or drop the table.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lucia
3 months ago
I'm a bit confused by all the role granting. I'll need to go through this step-by-step to make sure I understand who has what permissions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stefania
3 months ago
Okay, let's see. The SECURITYADMIN role granted ownership on future tables in the PROD.WORKING schema to the PROD_WORKING_OWNER role. Then the SYSADMIN role was granted that role. So I'm thinking C might be the answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Helaine
4 months ago
Hmm, this one seems tricky. I'll need to carefully read through the SQL commands and think about the permissions granted.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel