| From: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=) |
| Cc: | Keith F Irwin <kirwin14(at)home(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: HELP! BUG? pg_dump mucks up grant/revoke |
| Date: | 2001-08-04 03:14:15 |
| Message-ID: | 01080323141501.01696@lowen.wgcr.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-general |
On Friday 03 August 2001 16:35, Tom Lane wrote:
> teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=) writes:
> > I'd hope for "yes", although the available patch should solve the
> > problems for us (Red Hat Linux) as I'll add that.
> Okay. If you're doing a rerelease of pg_dump, please also pick up the
> REL7_1_STABLE commits I just made a few minutes ago; those clean up a
> couple other bits of breakage...
Whoa....
A pg_dump that can't be restored should be a release forcer, IMHO. After
all, we're talking about our only upgrade path here -- the last 7.1.x release
_MUST_ be able to make a dump that 7.2 can reliably read!
As PG 7.1 has never been released with an official Red Hat (it's in the
Roswell beta, IIRC), 're-release' is a misnomer from RH's POV.
I'm inclined to rerelease RPM's, though. Although I shouldn't call them
'7.1.2' RPM's at that point -- although I have an intarray asynchrony now...
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-08-04 04:23:25 | Re: [BUGS] WIN32 Non Blocking |
| Previous Message | Trond Eivind Glomsrød | 2001-08-03 20:44:41 | Re: HELP! BUG? pg_dump mucks up grant/revoke |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | GH | 2001-08-04 10:22:38 | Re: Referential Integrity thru Views |
| Previous Message | alavoor | 2001-08-04 01:56:45 | Very Precision Time for Database Server |