Tom Lane wrote:
> "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>>> The user running initdb (or the postmaster) needs
>>> SeCreateGlobalPrivilege - which is something we cannot really start
>>> telling people they must have. My view is that we revert the change
>>> (well, replace it with something that looks less like a broken attempt
>>> to use the global namespace) and leave it at that. iirc, the use of
>>> the global namespace is there to ensure things work as they should
>>> under a non-console terminal services session - which is pretty rare
>>> and can usually be avoided.
>
>> I'm not so sure that non-console terminal service sessions should be
>> categorized as "pretty rare".
>
> Would there be any value in trying a global name first and falling back
> to non-global if that fails?
Hmm. We could fail on the specific error that we get in this case,
perhaps. I think it should be "a required privilege is not held by the
client", which shouldn't occur otherwise. If it's just "access denied",
that could equally well be caused by a running postmaster in a different
session under a different useraccount...
//Magnus
