>>>>> On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 05:38:46 -0400, Bill Moran said: > > "David Ballester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi to all: > > > > Some days before I send a mail to the list asking about advices on > > problems with postgres database encoding and some bacula-fd in clients > > with incompatible encoding > > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_name=1190366372.6121.21.camel%40localhost.localdomain > > > > AFAIK, there is no answer. Don't wanna waste your time but this > > 'silence' is 'cause the answer is very obvious? :) In any way, thanks > > for all > > PostgreSQL is extremely particular about SQL encodings, and rejects > non-valid strings. If you've found a string that bacula tries to > insert that PG considers invalid, then you've either found a bug in > PG or in Bacula. (i.e., either bacula is submitting an invalid string, > or PostgreSQL is rejecting a valid one) > > In any event, you _should_ file a bug report. However, you mention > "old client" in your original post, but make no mention of the particular > version of Bacula on the director, sd or fd. Is it possible that you're > using an older version and this has been fixed in newer versions?
If this happens when the client machine is running unix, then I don't think it is a bug in Bacula (at worst it is a feature). The problem is that unix filesystems don't know anything about encodings, so can store any sequence of bytes as a filename. Bacula can't do anything about this, so I think it is a mistake to run the database with strict encoding checks. __Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
