MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAOYmi+=KTLd+XsEP=TDiZ48iVf-CEc7JrZd5uhWPYWKEfOgyyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+n_hw=SC5V1i3BmqfZPfPBRaUSJc+BeOXEKDwRue+WYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJTYsWXbrewUuiMekCmah3V3fA+ZvcASyV6CJgaUQ2Wc-M0MLw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJTYsWXbrewUuiMekCmah3V3fA+ZvcASyV6CJgaUQ2Wc-M0MLw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2026 15:54:06 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAOYmi+nns1VaW6W7kTJBTCTYVSfacJaZKyj-qxRuquT7082+WA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: REVOKE's CASCADE protection doesn't work with INHERITed table
 owners
To: Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari.slg01@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAOYmi%2Bnns1VaW6W7kTJBTCTYVSfacJaZKyj-qxRuquT7082%2BWA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 6, 2026 at 4:03=E2=80=AFAM Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari.slg01@gmai=
l.com> wrote:
> Thanks, this looks right to me.

Thanks for the review!

> One tiny comment question: the phrase "granted by any role on the chain"
> in the new comment reads a little oddly to me, would something like
> "still holds the option directly via another grantor" be closer to what
> the code checks?

The first sentence is still "The grantee might still have some grant
options via another grantor," and I don't think adding "direct" would
have helped me understand this any better the first time I read it.
I'm definitely up for more bikeshedding, though, because I don't
really like what I have...

> On check_circularity() for [1]: I tried the same aclmask_direct() swap,
> but since it runs on every GRANT ... WITH GRANT OPTION, which
> pg_dump/restore replays, erroring there could make restore/pg_upgrade of
> an existing cluster (one already holding the [1] self-grant) fail.

Well, I think the complaint in [1] is that dump/restore *already*
fails, no? Can you provide an example of a correct (or benignly
incorrect) dump that would start failing?

As an aside, I'm not sure if check_circularity() is correctly
preventing cycles independently of this issue, so that part may end up
spiraling a bit.

Thanks,
--Jacob