Re: drop user fails due to REVOKE?
- From: Paul Baumgartel <paul.baumgartel@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Oracle-L Freelists <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 13:36:56 -0400
The issue for me was this behavior on DROP USER. It may well be that
I just never ran into it before.
I did a test that confirmed the behavior (a DROP USER did not complete
until the termination of another session executing a procedure granted
to the user being dropped), so I'm going to assume this is as
intended. Thanks for your responses.
PB
On 6/28/05, Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> I've had similar issues with GRANTs in version 7.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something in your post, but this
> is expected behavior if the package is in use.
>
> Jared
>
>
>
> On 6/28/05, Paul Baumgartel <paul.baumgartel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all. I'm noticing some behavior in 10.1.0.4 that seems odd.
> >
> > I have a user A who has been directly granted EXECUTE on DBMS_LOCK and
> UTL_TCP.
> >
> > Attempts to DROP USER A CASCADE frequently succeed in dropping all of
> > the user's objects, but fail (after the default 5-minute timeout
> > period) to drop the user itself, reporting "timeout waiting to lock
> > object SYS.DBMS_LOCK" (or SYS.UTL_TCP).
> >
> > Now, I understand that grants and revokes must lock the object, and
> > will time out in this manner if the object is in use by another
> > session. I don't recall seeing this, though, in previous versions. I
> > wonder if there's an explicit REVOKE on the DROP USER, or if it's just
> > the recursive SQL to do the revoke. Does any of this ring a bell,
> > i.e., is this the expected behavior even pre-10g? Is there a
> > workaround?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Paul Baumgartel
> > paul.baumgartel@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > --
> > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jared Still
> Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist
>
>
--
Paul Baumgartel
paul.baumgartel@xxxxxxxxxxxx
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
