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

Re: Unable to drop role

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "McGehee, Robert" <Robert(dot)McGehee(at)geodecapital(dot)com>
Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unable to drop role
Date: 2010-08-24 13:36:05
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-adminpgsql-hackers
"McGehee, Robert" <Robert(dot)McGehee(at)geodecapital(dot)com> writes:
> Thanks Tom and Alvaro for clearing up my confusion.
> \l showed that a485099 had both (C)reate and (T)emporary access.
> Revoking those allowed me to drop the role. Thanks for the help!

I wonder whether Robert's confusion doesn't stem from a poor choice
of message wording:

>> template1=# DROP ROLE a485099;
>> ERROR:  role "a485099" cannot be dropped because some objects depend on it
>> DETAIL:  access to database template1

I can see how "access to" might be read as specifically meaning "CONNECT
privilege for".  Should we change this message from "access to whatever"
to "privileges for whatever", or some such wording?

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-08-24 13:38:43
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #5305: Postgres service stops when closing Windows session
Previous:From: Boxuan ZhaiDate: 2010-08-24 13:35:48
Subject: Re: gSoC add MERGE command new patch -- merge_v104

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Silvio BrandaniDate: 2010-08-24 13:46:08
Subject: replication solution
Previous:From: McGehee, RobertDate: 2010-08-24 13:25:30
Subject: Re: Unable to drop role

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group