On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > Piyush Newe <piyush.n...@enterprisedb.com> writes: > >> create table tbl(col int); > >> create user usr; > >> grant select on tbl to usr; > >> \c postgres usr; > >> REVOKE SELECT on tbl from usr; > >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" > >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" > >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" > >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" > >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" > >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" > >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" > >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" > >> REVOKE > > > You really should mention what version you're testing, but for the > > archives: I confirm this on 8.4.x and HEAD. 8.3 seems to behave sanely. > > I traced through this and determined that the extra messages are a > consequence of the column-level-privileges patch. > restrict_and_check_grant is invoked both on the whole relation, and > on each column (since we have to get rid of any per-column SELECT > privilege that might have been granted). > > I'm not sure offhand about a reasonable way to rearrange the code to > avoid duplicate messages.
Perhaps just add what can't be revoked? meaning: WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl" for column "foo" Then they aren't actually duplicate. Sincerely, Joshau D. Drake > > regards, tom lane > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering Respect is earned, not gained through arbitrary and repetitive use or Mr. or Sir. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
