On 05/30/2007 08:44:19 PM, Pedro Gimeno Fortea wrote:
> Note that this is not similar to the GRANT case. I'd say it's similar=20=
=20
> to wanting to delete a table created by another user: if you're not=20=20
> the owner, you can't, unless you're a superuser. The similarity=20=20
> becomes obvious when replacing "delete a table created by" with=20=20
> "revoke a privilege granted by" and "owner" by "grantor".
To further ellaborate on this, let me compare the REVOKE case with the=20=
=20
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS <table_name> case. If it does not exist,=20=20
PostgreSQL issues a NOTICE-level message (in the parallel case, REVOKE=20=
=20
prints nothing, which is OK to me). But if it exists and the user who=20=20
wants to drop the table is not the owner or a superuser, an ERROR-level=20=
=20
message is printed:
"ERROR: must be owner of relation auxiliar"
But, in the parallel case with REVOKE, nothing at all is printed. This=20=
=20
is a quite unexpected behaviour in my opinion.
