| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Bugs List <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #1145: silent REVOKE failures |
| Date: | 2004-06-09 15:40:34 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0406091733460.23525@sablons.cri.ensmp.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
> >> For the TODO, I would suggest something general:
> >> - fix grant/revoke wrt SQL standard, validate errors, warnings and successes.
>
> > Tom, is this done?
>
> I think so. At least, we're a lot closer to spec than we were.
Indeed.
Maybe the validation part could be improved somehow, with test cases
build from the sql specification and the expected behavior checked
against the actual behavior.
What I derived from the many discussion and time I spent on the standard
is that there is a lot of subtlety involved.
So maybe the following TODO could be kept:
- validate grant/revoke (error, warning, success0 wrt sql standard
I may be interested in implementing ROLEs someday, and such tests would be
welcome just to check that nothing is broken.
--
Fabien Coelho - coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Crispin Miller | 2004-06-09 16:36:35 | Identifying cause of "database system shutdown was interrupted" at failed startup |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-09 15:25:40 | Re: BUG #1145: silent REVOKE failures |