| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Eugen Konkov <konkove(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Documentation does not describes format for access privileges: =Tc/user |
| Date: | 2023-12-25 18:02:57 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYtgkkGr0nx_vn255hXxdBnoV=_9expMk+KHxooP=9oZA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Monday, December 25, 2023, Eugen Konkov <konkove(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> No, it does not. If you refer to `An empty grantee field in an aclitem
> stands for PUBLIC.` then "grantee field" was never described. What is
> this?
>
> It would be very clear if it was described in this way:
> The access privileges has the following format: "grantee=privileges/who
> grants".
>
>
Yes, it requires a bit of mental gymnastics to read. The description says
Calvin is the role being granted the privileges which makes that the
grantee and Calvin is listed before the equal sign in the reference.
“Who grants” is the “grantor”.
I’ll accept that this can be improved but aside from a dictionary
definition of grantee, which we don’t usually do, everything is shown.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-12-25 18:16:33 | Re: Documentation does not describes format for access privileges: =Tc/user |
| Previous Message | Eugen Konkov | 2023-12-25 17:48:31 | Re: Documentation does not describes format for access privileges: =Tc/user |