* Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > On 2014-11-21 10:12:40 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > > I still think this change makes the error message more verbose, without > > > any win in clarity. > > > > Can we agree that there should be consistency? > > Consistency with what? Are you thinking of the messages in > aclck.c:no_priv_msg? I don't think that's really comparable. A > permission denied on a relation is much easier to understand than > replication permissions and such.
The discussion around wording started here, I believe:
20141022231834.ga1...@alvin.alvh.no-ip.org
Perhaps more to your question though, all checks of
'have_createdb_privilege' return 'permission denied to' style errors,
'have_createrole_privilege' returns 'permission denied' style for all
except where it returns the more specific 'must have admin option',
the 'has_rolcatupdate' check returns 'permission denied', and the
'has_bypassrls_privilege' check returns 'insufficient privilege' (note:
I'm in favor of changing that to use 'permission denied' instead too).
With regard to ereport() calls which return
ERRCODE_INSUFFICIENT_PRIVILEGE, things are pretty mixed up. Some places
places say 'permission denied to' and then have 'must be superuser' as a
hint while others just say 'must be superuser' and then others are just
'permission denied' (such as aclchk.c:no_priv_msg).
> It'd surely not be better if pg_basebackup would a error message bar
> actually helpful information.
ENOPARSE. I certainly agree that we want useful information to be
returned, in general..
> Btw, the replication permission use in
> postinit.c isn't related to slots.
Err, no, of course not, that should still be referring to starting
walsender.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
