From: | John Scalia <jayknowsunix(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Strange inconsistency using psql |
Date: | 2019-12-18 17:28:46 |
Message-ID: | 2A39B85B-54CC-485B-9722-FCA13396E271@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
I had to do some privilege assignments this morning on a bunch of tables, sequences, functions, and views. On all of these object, I generally try to use a command like:
GRANT all ON TABLE x TO new_user;
Where TABLE is either that object or a SEQUENCE or FUNCTION. These all worked perfectly for me. What did not work was specifying that the object was a VIEW. The system would spit out a syntax error at the object’s name being specified, however, if I omitted the word VIEW, and not specify the type of object, then the GRANT succeeded.
Was this intentional behavior, or is the grammar slightly amiss? All the other types of objects worked perfectly with this style of command.
—
Jay
Sent from my iPad
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Keith | 2019-12-18 17:41:10 | Re: Strange inconsistency using psql |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2019-12-18 09:14:28 | Re: Complete PGADMIN4 installation instructions |