On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote: >> On 12/11/15 4:12 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> > As with ACLs, the DROP OWNED BY caller must have permission to modify >> > the policy or a WARNING is thrown and no change is made to the policy. >> >> That warning doesn't tell the user anything about how to fix the >> situation or whether or why the situation is a problem and what to do >> about it. > > I modeled it after the other warnings which are output by DROP OWNED BY > when it's unable to perform the requested drop. I'm not against trying > to add something, but you tend to get a bunch of those messages at once > which means having a hint would result in a bunch of repeated messages > and I don't think that'd be very helpful. Further, it's essentially a > 'permission denied' type of error, which generally means that the > individual who is running it can't do anything to fix it anyway. > > I'm not against looking to improve things here, but I don't think just > trying to make a change here makes sense. We could throw a warning+hint > at the end of DROP OWNED, if anything wasn't able to be dropped, which > provided more information, perhaps. I'm not convinced that would really > be very useful to the individual running the command and would need to, > in essence, be "please get someone with higher privileges to run this, > or get them to give you permission to run it". I don't think we really > want to go there (anyone else recall the "please see your network > administrator" errors..?). > > If I'm misunderstanding your thoughts here, please let me know.
This appears to address one of the open items at https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.5_Open_Items -- if so, please update that page. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers