On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 07:36, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I can see how "access to" might be read as specifically meaning "CONNECT
> privilege for". Should we change this message from "access to whatever"
> to "privileges for whatever", or some such wording?
+1, There have been a few times I found that message not very um helpful.