Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UthIf-0006oW-Nm for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 16:50:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UthIe-0005ov-Se for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 16:50:00 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UthEu-0000ln-OZ for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 16:46:08 +0000 Received: from sam.nabble.com ([216.139.236.26]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UthEr-0003p9-KW for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 16:46:08 +0000 Received: from [192.168.236.26] (helo=sam.nabble.com) by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UthEq-0008Q0-1o for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 09:46:04 -0700 Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 09:46:04 -0700 (PDT) From: David Johnston To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Message-ID: <1372697164049-5762060.post@n5.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <59BF48FAC524384DA413D8F4F2E4BA6907D9A9DA@CINURCNA06.e2k.ad.ge.com> References: <59BF48FAC524384DA413D8F4F2E4BA6907D9A9DA@CINURCNA06.e2k.ad.ge.com> Subject: Re: How was I able to drop a role even though objects depend on it? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pg-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-admin Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org Wojciechowski, Robert (GE Transportation) wrote > [...] there is a database that shows this connect grant to a user that was > known as foo1_userA (oid 3562339547): 3562339547=c/postgres The main user dependent situation is having said user OWNER on a database object. Simply giving a user connect privileges on a database does not make the database dependent upon said user and so removing said user remains possible. Either (or both) a more explicit description or a self-contained test case is needed to figure out if you are simply mis-understanding the situation or if there truly is a bug. The sentence I quoted above leads me to think operator-error. David J. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/How-was-I-able-to-drop-a-role-even-though-objects-depend-on-it-tp5762049p5762060.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - admin mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin