Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The attached patch appears to solve the problem. However, while it makes us conform to the first sentence below from the docs, it doesn't comply with the second. Not sure what to do about that. Maybe there's a better solution?
Attached patch seems much better, I think.
I think it is still not quite there. Since as you noted the backend will complain if line endings don't match, if we hit EOF then we have to cons up a \. line with the correct ending. (BTW, this is not actually necessary when talking 3.0 protocol, but it is when talking to an older server.)
I modified the patch a little more and applied the attached. It seems to work for me but could use more testing.
WorksForMe, and looks good. You're right, I had forgotten the EOF case.
Should it be backported for the upcoming stable release(s)? Bruce and I were discussing this earlier.
Pro: it's an ugly bug and hard to diagnose - things just seem to die for no apparent reason.
Con: there's a workaround - just make sure to run dos2unix on your file if necessary.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
