From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: tarest2@gmail.com
cc: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: The synopsis of "ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES" statement is too
 difficult to understand
In-reply-to: <161255874662.10297.16360845410596491854@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
References: <161255874662.10297.16360845410596491854@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
Comments: In-reply-to PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>
	message dated "Fri, 05 Feb 2021 20:59:06 +0000"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <329136.1612644506.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2021 15:48:26 -0500
Message-ID: <329137.1612644506@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> The syntax/synopsis of the "ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES" statement on the
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/sql-alterdefaultprivileges.html page can
> be simplified to the below form:
> [ factor out privileges and object type ]

Hmm.  I can't get too excited about doing that unless we refactor
the GRANT and REVOKE synopses similarly.  The factorization seems
a little weird too --- the sub-production is not just privileges,
but privileges and target object type (or in GRANT/REVOKE, it'd
be specific target object(s)).  Maybe that's okay, but I'm not 100%
sold on this way being any clearer.

Maybe it'd help to split the GRANT and REVOKE cases completely,
along the lines of

ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES
    [ FOR { ROLE | USER } target_role [, ...] ]
    [ IN SCHEMA schema_name [, ...] ]
    GRANT privilege_and_object_type
    TO { [ GROUP ] role_name | PUBLIC } [, ...] [ WITH GRANT OPTION ]

ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES
    [ FOR { ROLE | USER } target_role [, ...] ]
    [ IN SCHEMA schema_name [, ...] ]
    REVOKE [ GRANT OPTION FOR ] privilege_and_object_type
    FROM { [ GROUP ] role_name | PUBLIC } [, ...] [ CASCADE | RESTRICT ]

where privilege_and_object_type is one of:

{ SELECT | INSERT | UPDATE | DELETE | TRUNCATE | REFERENCES | TRIGGER }
    [, ...] | ALL [ PRIVILEGES ] }
    ON TABLES
... etc etc ...

			regards, tom lane