Re: [HACKERS] Support UTF-8 files with BOM in COPY FROM

2011-09-26 Thread Brar Piening
Tom Lane wrote: Note that the reference to byte order betrays the implicit context assumption: that we're talking about UTF16 or UTF32 representation. Note that there is no implicit context assumption in the Unicode FAQ. It's equally covering UTF-8, UTF-16 and UTF-32. Another quote: Q: Can a UT

Re: [HACKERS] Online base backup from the hot-standby

2011-09-26 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> In backup.sgml  the new section titled "Making a Base Backup during >> Recovery"  I would prefer to see some mention in the title that this >> procedure is for standby servers ie "Making a Base Backup from a Standby >> Database".  Users who h

Re: [HACKERS] Support UTF-8 files with BOM in COPY FROM

2011-09-26 Thread Brar Piening
Brar Piening wrote: It's a pity that the Unicode standard actually allows something that can cause problems but blaming the non-platform again doesn't solve the existing issues. To put in a more humoruos but actually correct way: M$ has found a standard conforming way of preventing users to

Re: [HACKERS] bug of recovery?

2011-09-26 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 26.09.2011 21:06, Simon Riggs wrote: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: Currently, if a reference to an invalid page is found during recovery, its information is saved in hash table "invalid_page_tab". Then, if such a reference is resolved, its information is removed from

Re: [HACKERS] bug of recovery?

2011-09-26 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 27.09.2011 00:28, Florian Pflug wrote: On Sep26, 2011, at 22:39 , Tom Lane wrote: It might be worthwhile to invoke XLogCheckInvalidPages() as soon as we (think we) have reached consistency, rather than leaving it to be done only when we exit recovery mode. I believe we also need to prevent

<    1   2