# Db:seed\_fu fails on 002\_groups.rb during upgrade: Validation failed: Name has already been taken
**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/db-seed-fu-fails-on-002-groups-rb-during-upgrade-validation-failed-name-has-already-been-taken/404037
**Category:** Bug
**Tags:** fixed
**Created:** [28 mei 2026 om 20:40 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/db-seed-fu-fails-on-002-groups-rb-during-upgrade-validation-failed-name-has-already-been-taken/404037 "2026-05-28T20:40:54Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 8
### Author:  [@martin](https://meta.discourse.org/u/martin)
#### Post date: [1 juni 2026 om 05:41 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/db-seed-fu-fails-on-002-groups-rb-during-upgrade-validation-failed-name-has-already-been-taken/404037/8 "2026-06-01T05:41:34Z")
Okay this should do the trick, it also fixes some issues with the upcoming change logic for [Granular group-based permissions for anonymous and logged in users](https://meta.discourse.org/t/granular-group-based-permissions-for-anonymous-and-logged-in-users/402273) :
>
>
> Followup 9359227645bb3a3cb4c17d9313d9aadfc545c563
>
> As pointed out in https://m…eta.discourse.org/t/-/404037,
> the group name "anonymous" is too generic and can conflict
> with existing \_users\_ as well as existing groups. This commit
> renames it to "anonymous\_users" to avoid such conflicts, and
> also to match "logged\_in\_users" a bit better.
>
> In addition, this PR fixes some issues with the upcoming
> change introduced in 9359227645bb3a3cb4c17d9313d9aadfc545c563...
> the anonymous/logged\_in\_users groups were not showing in the admin
> UI when the UC was enabled, and the logic for keeping everyone
> saved in the DB for now was not working for site settings.
---
_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/db-seed-fu-fails-on-002-groups-rb-during-upgrade-validation-failed-name-has-already-been-taken/404037)._