* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
One thought is that the column cases should be phrased more like
no privileges could be revoked for column foo of table bar
Check the messages associated with DROP cascading for the canonical
phrasing here, but I think that's what it is.
Looks like
Hi,
Description:
===
Repetition of warning message with revoke.
How to reproduce :
==
create table tbl(col int);
create user usr;
grant select on tbl to usr;
\c postgres usr;
REVOKE SELECT on tbl from usr;
Actual output:
WARNING: no privileges
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
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
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
All,
* Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
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
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote:
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.
Yeah, they really aren't, after all.
Yeah, I agree
