> I attempted to install from postgresql-8.0-beta2-dev3.msi, got
to the end, and it failed with a message:
>Failed to create process for initdb: 1385. I am a local administrator
and I used a custom service account and a
>custom su account.
This is aknown issue with the installer - the created account needs Log
On Locally, Access From Network and Log On as a Service rights. The
installer only ensues Log on as a Service as it is now. This will be
fixed in the next release.
> I then fired up my dev environment and wrote some code to
discover that 1385 is: Logon failure: the user has > not been granted
the requested logon type at this computer.
No need for code - just run "net helpmsg 1385". To see *which* right is
missing, you need to enable auditing in yuor local security policy and
check the security eventlog.
> So I added the service account to the Administrators > group, and got
the attached warning/error about using an
> account that's a member of the Admninistrators group.
This is where you did wrong.
> Hmm, this install is quite a challenge for a Windowz box ;-). So I
used another local service account, but got a > user/password failure
notification - which is strange since it uses the same password as the
other account (so
> the install cleared the internal password variable after changing the
userId but not the password input box). So > I added the service account
to the lsa privs: Log on as a batch job, log on as a service, and Act as
part of the > operating system (in case calling LogonUser), and got the
same errors. Strange, that during the original install, > it detected a
missing priv and claimed to add it (I thought it was log on as a
service) but when I went to add
> it, it wasn't there.
See above about required rights (they're even in the FAQ). You definitly
do *not* need Act as part of the OS - that is a *very* sensitive right
that's not even granted to Administrators by default.
Yes, it's certainly a bit unpolished so far. But we're getting there.
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Kent Tong||Date: 2004-09-24 09:30:40|
|Subject: Re: BUG #1268: Two different Unicode chars are treated as|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-09-24 04:33:01|
|Subject: Re: BUG #1268: Two different Unicode chars are treated as |