On Tue, 2002-02-26 at 19:02, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I did it this morning on getting the Debian bug report (against 7.1.3)
> > and it failed. I repeated it just now to check after reading your reply
> > and it succeeded, using exactly the same input file (in which there is
> > indeed a tab after the first field before the empty string.) And I was
> > certainly running 7.2 both times.
> What the heck? Something is weird there. Maybe there is some
> additional condition needed to cause a problem. Can you send me the bug
I will if I can make it happen again.
The only thing I can think of at the moment is that this morning I may
have used cut-and-paste to write the input file or to read in the
commands, either of which would have lost the tabs.
The original reporter's mail had no tabs at all, but it was not an
attachment and it had had lost all its tabs along the way. His input
script came from 7.0 pg_dump. I am following up with him whether there
are actually tabs before the empty fields in that pg_dump output.
Oliver Elphick Oliver(dot)Elphick(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk
Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while
we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2002-02-26 21:44:06|
|Subject: Re: COPY incorrectly uses null instead of an empty string in last field |
|Previous:||From: Colin Faber||Date: 2002-02-26 20:40:21|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.0 ??|