Re: [GENERAL] Surprising syntax error

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Marc Munro <marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Surprising syntax error
Date: 2008-06-30 22:39:13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Marc Munro wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> The statement:
> revoke all on view internal.all_objects from public;
> yields a syntax error. The docs show that the word "view" is not
> acceptable in this statement which is fine but the surprising thing is
> that:
> ? revoke all on table internal.all_objects from public;
> works fine even though all_objects is a view and not a table.
> Now that I know about it, this doesn't bother me but it was a surprise
> and I wonder whether the the parser/planner/whatever should be a bit
> smarter about allowing the word table to apply to non-tables, and
> whether the word view ought to be allowed.

Yes, I can confirm this behavior on CVS HEAD, and it is odd:

test=> CREATE SCHEMA internal;
test=> CREATE VIEW internal.all_objects AS SELECT 1;
test=> REVOKE ALL ON VIEW internal.all_objects FROM PUBLIC;
ERROR: syntax ERROR AT OR near "internal"
LINE 1: REVOKE ALL ON VIEW internal.all_objects FROM PUBLIC;
test=> REVOKE ALL ON TABLE internal.all_objects FROM PUBLIC;

Is there a downside to adding "VIEW" in parser/gram.y:privilege_target?

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to


Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message EBIHARA, Yuichiro 2008-07-01 01:05:33 Re: server log files
Previous Message sheikh salman 2008-06-30 20:51:10 Query Fails

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2008-06-30 22:43:01 Re: [HACKERS] Hint Bits and Write I/O
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2008-06-30 22:13:12 Re: odd output in restore mode