> On Oct 7, 2021, at 7:44 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>
> I don't actually think REVOKE ROLE CASCADE must not fail, nor do I see
> that as explicit in anything you quote above.
I don't see that myself, but I thought that you would, given your other statements about how we shouldn't take a spec
requirementto do X and turn it into doing X+Y, because the user wouldn't be expecting Y. So I thought that if DROP
ROLEbob was defined in the spec to basically just do REVOKE bob FROM EVERYBODY, and if the CASCADE version of that
wasn'tsupposed to fail, then you'd say that DROP ROLE bob CASCADE wasn't supposed to fail either. (Failing is the
unexpectedaction Y that I expected your rule to prohibit.)
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
