On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 04:22:18PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >>So, right now we are only add \r for function bodies, which is mostly > >>harmless, but what if a function body has strings with an embedded > >>newlines? What about creating a table with newlines in its identifiers: > >> > >>CREATE TABLE "a > >>b" ("c > >>d" int); > >> > >>If \r is added in there, it would be a data corruption problem. Can you > >>test that? > > > >These are among the reasons why I am suggesting opening the file > >in binary mode. You're right, that would be data corruption. > > > >I can set up a check, but it will take a bit of time. > > > As expected, we get a difference in field names. Here's the extract > from the dumps diff (* again represents CR): > > > *************** > *** 5220,5228 **** > -- > > CREATE TABLE hasnewline ( > ! "x > y" integer, > ! "a > b" text > ); > > --- 5220,5228 ---- > -- > > CREATE TABLE hasnewline ( > ! "x* > y" integer, > ! "a* > b" text > ); > > If we open the input and output files in binary mode in pg_upgrade's > dump.c this disappears. > > Given this, I think we have no choice but to apply the patch, all > the way back to 9.0 in fact.
I think you are right. I think I could use some "quite time" right now, as Tom suggested. ;-) -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers