Re: pg_dump and REVOKE on function

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: pg_dump and REVOKE on function
Date: 2003-08-12 21:15:52
Message-ID: 16611.1060722952@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> r=# REVOKE ALL ON FUNCTION weekdate (date) FROM PUBLIC;
> REVOKE
> r=# GRANT ALL ON FUNCTION weekdate (date) TO PUBLIC;
> GRANT
> r=# REVOKE ALL ON FUNCTION weekdate (date) FROM rbt;
> ERROR: dependent privileges exist
> HINT: Use CASCADE to revoke them too.

Ugh. We could fix pg_dump to output the commands in a better order,
but that won't help for dumps from existing releases.

Given that rbt is the owner of the object, I'm not sure that it is
sensible to interpret the above as revoking his ability to grant
privileges to others. Seems to me that his ability to GRANT is inherent
in being the owner, and as such his "grant option" bits are irrelevant.
So maybe the commands are okay and the backend's interpretation is
bogus.

Peter, any thoughts?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-08-12 22:04:25 Re: reuse sysids security hole?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-08-12 20:58:08 Re: Parsing speed (was Re: pgstats_initstats() cost)