Was thinking if someone could summarize this all it would make a really good
FAQ entry.
Robert Treat
On Friday 09 December 2005 13:28, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 12:38:21PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
This means someone who is planning on upgrading to 8.1 in two
I don't see it asked very often, and I think our 8.1 releae note
addition (plus a mention in the 8.1.1 notes) will complete this.
---
Robert Treat wrote:
Was thinking if someone could summarize this all it would make a
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I don't see it asked very often, and I think our 8.1 releae note
addition (plus a mention in the 8.1.1 notes) will complete this.
Actually a upgrade FAQ is probably a good idea. Something that says
what really happens
when foo changes in 8.1 or how foo is different
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 05:54:35PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
No, what is needed for people who care about fixing their data is a
loadable strip_invalid_utf8() that works in older versions.. then just
select * from bar where foo != strip_invalid_utf8(foo); The function
would be useful in
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 05:54:35PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
No, what is needed for people who care about fixing their data is a
loadable strip_invalid_utf8() that works in older versions.. then just
select * from bar where
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 11:34:22AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I think the problem with any kind of function-call detection is that the
data has to get into the database first, and it isn't clear how someone
loading a failed dump would do that aside from modifying the column to
bytea in the
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 11:34:22AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I think the problem with any kind of function-call detection is that the
data has to get into the database first, and it isn't clear how someone
loading a failed dump
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 12:38:21PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
This means someone who is planning on upgrading to 8.1 in two months
can use this function now to weed out the bad data before the upgrade
even starts.
Oh, so you back-load it into the old database. Interesting. I assume
to
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Exactly what does vim do that iconv does not? Fuzzy encoding sounds
scary to me.
Right. It actually makes assumptions about the source encoding. People who
care about their data need, unfortunately, to spend a bit of time on this
problem. I've been
Gavin Sherry wrote:
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Exactly what does vim do that iconv does not? Fuzzy encoding sounds
scary to me.
Right. It actually makes assumptions about the source encoding. People who
care about their data need, unfortunately, to spend a bit of time
On 12/8/05, Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us wrote:
A script which identifies non-utf-8 characters and provides some
context, line numbers, etc, will greatly speed up the process of
remedying the situation.
I think the best we can do is the iconv -c with the diff
I have added your suggestions to the 8.1.X release notes.
---
Paul Lindner wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 10:54:08AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Neil Conway wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
I have added your suggestions to the 8.1.X release notes.
Did you read the followup discussion? Recommending -c without a large
warning seems a very bad idea.
regards, tom lane
---(end of
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
I have added your suggestions to the 8.1.X release notes.
Did you read the followup discussion? Recommending -c without a large
warning seems a very bad idea.
Well, I said it would remove invalid sequences. What else should we
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
I have added your suggestions to the 8.1.X release notes.
Did you read the followup discussion? Recommending -c without a large
warning seems a very bad idea.
Well, I said it would remove invalid
Bruce Momjian wrote:
One nice solution would be if iconv would report the lines with
errors and you could correct them, but I see no way to do that. The
only thing you could do is to diff the old and new files to see the
problems. Is that helpful? Here is new text I have used:
I think this
Nice, updated.
---
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
One nice solution would be if iconv would report the lines with
errors and you could correct them, but I see no way to do that. The
only thing you
Hi,
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Nice, updated.
---
I think my suggestion from the other day is useful also.
---
Omar Kilani and I have spent a few hours looking at the problem. For
situations where there
Exactly what does vim do that iconv does not? Fuzzy encoding sounds
scary to me.
---
Gavin Sherry wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Nice, updated.
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 10:54:08AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Neil Conway wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 10:56 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
It's been about a month since 8.1.0 was released, and we've found about
the usual number of bugs for a new release, so it seems like it's time
for 8.1.1.
Paul Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
To convert your pre-8.1 database to 8.1 you may have to remove and/or
fix the offending characters. One simple way to fix the problem is to
run your pg_dump output through the iconv command like this:
iconv -c -f UTF8 -t UTF8 -o fixed.sql dump.sql
Is
On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 11:34:16AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Paul Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
To convert your pre-8.1 database to 8.1 you may have to remove and/or
fix the offending characters. One simple way to fix the problem is to
run your pg_dump output through the iconv command
Paul Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 11:34:16AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Paul Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
iconv -c -f UTF8 -t UTF8 -o fixed.sql dump.sql
Is that really a one-size-fits-all solution? Especially with -c?
I'd say yes, and the -c flag is needed so
On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 12:19:32PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
That's exactly what's bothering me about it. If we recommend that
we had better put a large THIS WILL DESTROY YOUR DATA warning first.
The problem is that the data is not invalid from the user's point
of view --- more
Hi all,
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
Paul Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
To convert your pre-8.1 database to 8.1 you may have to remove and/or
fix the offending characters. One simple way to fix the problem is to
run your pg_dump output through the iconv command like this:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 10:56 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
It's been about a month since 8.1.0 was released, and we've found about
the usual number of bugs for a new release, so it seems like it's time
for 8.1.1.
I think one fix that should be made in time for 8.1.1 is adding a note
to the version
Neil Conway wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 10:56 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
It's been about a month since 8.1.0 was released, and we've found about
the usual number of bugs for a new release, so it seems like it's time
for 8.1.1.
I think one fix that should be made in time for 8.1.1 is adding
Tom Lane wrote:
We will
at the same time be making new dot-releases in the 7.3, 7.4, and 8.0
branches, principally to fix the SLRU race condition reported by Jim
Nasby and Robert Creager.
Was there a conclusion out of the recent discussion on EOL policy? The
consensus seemed to be
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Have we actually officially stopped supporting the 7.2 series?
Yeah, we have. It reached the too difficult to support point already
(the VACUUM/ctid bug back in August --- the patch used in the later
branches wouldn't apply at all, IIRC).
All this
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:40, Tom Lane wrote:
Personally I expect to keep supporting 7.3 for a long while, because Red
Hat pays me to ;-) ... and the EOL date for RHEL3 is a long way away yet.
The PG community may stop bothering with 7.3 releases before that. But
I think Marc and Bruce
Tom Lane said:
We hashed all this out in the pghackers list back in August, but I
agree there ought to be something about it on the website.
The reason I asked again is that, notwithstanding the recent discussion, I
have observed confusion about the matter (including Jan telling me he didn't
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 01:23:38PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:40, Tom Lane wrote:
Personally I expect to keep supporting 7.3 for a long while,
because Red Hat pays me to ;-) ... and the EOL date for RHEL3 is a
long way away yet. The PG community may stop
32 matches
Mail list logo
