Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BUG #1145: silent REVOKE failures

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: BUG #1145: silent REVOKE failures
Date: 2004-05-18 22:59:19
Message-ID: 8648.1084921159@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> writes:
> For the TODO, I would suggest something general:
> - fix grant/revoke wrt SQL standard, validate errors, warnings and successes.

I have a patch-in-progress that addresses these issues.  I didn't get it
quite finished before leaving for vacation, but hope to clean it up and
commit soon.  There was an open issue, which was whether we want the
owner's grant options to be shown in the default ACL value or not.
(This would be only cosmetic and not functional, because the code will
treat the owner as having grant options in any case.)  A related
question is whether the information_schema display of grant options
should track what the ACL says or tell the truth, namely that the owner
has grant options regardless.  (Doing the latter would force changing
the API of aclcontains(), hence initdb.)

I asked for opinions on this but got little feedback.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-05-19 00:12:39
Subject: Re: Patch for not going beyond NOFILE system limit
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-05-18 22:51:14
Subject: Re: BUG #1142: Problem with update permissions for view

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group