Re: REVOKE ALL ON ALL OBJECTS IN ALL SCHEMAS FROM some_role?

On Tue, Jul 8, 2025 at 12:54 PM DINESH NAIR <Dinesh_Nair(at)iitmpravartak(dot)net>
wrote:

> When we create a role ,it has no inherent dependencies on other database
> objects.
>

That is patently false otherwise it wouldn't be able to, say, perform:
select version(); See the PUBLIC pseudo-role.

> So, when we execute cascade option for role then >> drop role .. Cascade
> then impact will be high
>

Yeah, don't use cascade.

> *It will drop all objects owned by the role:* This is the most
> significant effect. It will drop tables, views, sequences, functions,
> schemas, and any other database objects that the role owns.
>

Which is why you reassign them first. This is the only real harmful action
given the fact that the role is going away. And why one should not use
cascade.

> *Revokes all privileges granted to the role:* Any GRANT statements that
> gave permissions to role_name will be undone.
>

Good...and what "drop owned by" does once you get the truly owned objects
out of the way via reassigned owned.

> *Removes the role from any roles it is a member of.*
>

Good...

> *Removes any roles that are members of role_name from role_name.*
>

This could have knock-on effects so yeah, this needs to be considered and
dealt with.

Also, could you please start doing inline/bottom posting like everyone else
here does?

David J.