Jeff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is this not a bug?
I don't actually see that it is. The documentation is perfectly clear
on the point:
(It is your responsibility that the byte sequences you create
are valid characters in the server character set encoding.)
(This is in 4
"Konstantin Pelepelin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> pg_restore: restoring large object OID 70380132
> pg_restore: restored 5116 large objects
> pg_restore: restoring BLOB COMMENTS
> pg_restore: [tar archiver] could not find header for file 2004.dat in tar
> archive
> pg_restore: *** aborted becaus
On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 16:13 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I created a patch that appears to fix the problem, and does not appear
> > to break anything else.
>
> ... except maybe bytea ...
>
Ok. So then it seems that the only possible places to fix it are in
"Ivan Volf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> drin=# reindex database 06test;
> ERROR: syntax error kod ili u blizini "06" at character 18
This isn't a bug. If you want to use names that aren't ordinary
identifiers, you need to double-quote them.
regards, tom lane
-
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2727
Logged by: Konstantin Pelepelin
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1.5
Operating system: RHEL4
Description:pg_restore error on BLOB COMMENTS
Details:
I think, it is part of bug #2452 (
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2726
Logged by: Ivan Volf
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1
Operating system: linux
Description:reindex database failed if number is in database name
Details:
drin=# reindex database tes
Jeff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I created a patch that appears to fix the problem, and does not appear
> to break anything else.
... except maybe bytea ...
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versio
On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 14:42 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> You can insert invalid UTF8 bytes sequences into a TEXT type on an 8.1
> installation by doing something like:
>
I created a patch that appears to fix the problem, and does not appear
to break anything else.
Is this acceptable?
Regards,
