[GENERAL] \copy: unexpected response (4)

2009-08-07 Thread Neil Best
I have set up a batch job that pipes a couple hundred of \copy commands to psql. It starts out well enough, sprinkled with a few error messages that I intend to circle back and clean up after batching all of the ALTER commands that I need, but then: \copy gm1 from export/month1-88/13m/GM1.dat cs

Re: [GENERAL] \copy: unexpected response (4)

2009-08-07 Thread Neil Best
Tom Lane-2 wrote: > > Hmm. It looks like psql could get into an infinite loop if the server > failed to exit COPY IN mode for some reason, but it's not at all clear > how that could happen (or what to do about it). What server version > and what psql version is this? What does the server's l

Re: [GENERAL] \copy: unexpected response (4)

2009-08-07 Thread Neil Best
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > BTW, the "SSL renegotiation failure" bit > suggests that it could have been an OpenSSL bug not a real network > lossage, so you might want to see how up-to-date your openssl libraries > are. Thanks for your comments, Tom. The operation seems more

Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] \copy: unexpected response (4)

2009-08-14 Thread Neil Best
Tom Lane-2 wrote: > > Neil Best writes: >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> BTW, the "SSL renegotiation failure" bit >>> suggests that it could have been an OpenSSL bug not a real network >>> lossage, so you might want to

Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] \copy: unexpected response (4)

2009-08-14 Thread Neil Best
Tom Lane-2 wrote: > > Neil Best writes: >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> BTW, the "SSL renegotiation failure" bit >>> suggests that it could have been an OpenSSL bug not a real network >>> lossage, so you might want to

Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] \copy: unexpected response (4)

2009-08-14 Thread Neil Best
Tom Lane-2 wrote: > > Sorry, I meant to ask whether the *failure* was repeatable. > Oh, I see. Well, to the extent that i had the same problem in two different remote clients before finding that the local connection work-around made it go away, I would say that it was repeatable. In short,