From: | Marc Munro <marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Surprising syntax error |
Date: | 2008-05-14 19:07:04 |
Message-ID: | 1210792024.3296.32.camel@bloodnok.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
The statement:
revoke all on view internal.all_objects from public;
yields a syntax error. The docs show that the word "view" is not
acceptable in this statement which is fine but the surprising thing is
that:
revoke all on table internal.all_objects from public;
works fine even though all_objects is a view and not a table.
Now that I know about it, this doesn't bother me but it was a surprise
and I wonder whether the the parser/planner/whatever should be a bit
smarter about allowing the word table to apply to non-tables, and
whether the word view ought to be allowed.
__
Marc
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sam Mason | 2008-05-14 19:27:19 | Re: rounding problems |
Previous Message | mailtolouis2020-postgres | 2008-05-14 19:05:22 | Re: postgres crash when select a record |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-05-14 19:25:10 | Re: What to do with inline warnings? |
Previous Message | Andrew Chernow | 2008-05-14 18:09:09 | Re: libpq object hooks |