On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Piyush Newe <piyush.newe@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 could be revoked for "tbl"
> >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl"
> >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl"
> >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl"
> >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl"
> >> WARNING: no privileges could be revoked for "tbl"
> >> REVOKE
>
> > You really should mention what version you're testing, but for the
> > archives: I confirm this on 8.4.x and HEAD. 8.3 seems to behave sanely.
>
> I traced through this and determined that the extra messages are a
> consequence of the column-level-privileges patch.
> restrict_and_check_grant is invoked both on the whole relation, and
> on each column (since we have to get rid of any per-column SELECT
> privilege that might have been granted).
>
> 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 revoked for "tbl" for column "foo"
Then they aren't actually duplicate.
Sincerely,
Joshau D. Drake
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
Respect is earned, not gained through arbitrary and repetitive use or Mr. or Sir.