Re: BUG #1145: silent REVOKE failures
От | Fabien COELHO |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #1145: silent REVOKE failures |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.58.0405011050240.1338@mordor.coelho.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #1145: silent REVOKE failures (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Dear Tom, > "PostgreSQL Bugs List" <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org> writes: > > The REVOKE failure should be reported. > > What failure? This looks perfectly fine to me. "Ex nihilo dixit quod libet", as we used to say in latin and in maths. Sorry if say something stupid, but I cannot see why it is fine. Well, if I issue a "REVOKE" and the rights are not revoked and could never have been because I have no right to issue such statement on the object, I tend to call this deep absence of success a "failure". If I do the very opposite GRANT, I have a clear "permission denied". I wish I had the very same error on REVOKE, because for both operations you should need to be either a super user, the owner or to have a relevant grant options? Look at the very same with unix: sh> chmod o-r /tmp/ chmod: changing permissions of `/tmp/': Operation not permitted If you want to call that a "feature", I disagree without further strong argument, and anyway the documentation should be clear about that. Have a nice day, -- Fabien Coelho - coelho@cri.ensmp.fr
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: