Re: PostgreSQL 7.3/RH 9/PGAdmin Not a good combo?

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Jim Hines" <jhines(at)wdtv(dot)com>, <pgadmin-support(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 7.3/RH 9/PGAdmin Not a good combo?
Date: 2003-04-03 19:07:21
Message-ID: 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B8259EF5@mail.vale-housing.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-support

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Hines [mailto:jhines(at)wdtv(dot)com]
> Sent: 03 April 2003 20:05
> To: Dave Page; pgadmin-support(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-support] PostgreSQL 7.3/RH 9/PGAdmin
> Not a good combo?
>
>
> On Thursday 03 April 2003 01:47 pm, Dave Page wrote:
> > Hi Jim,
> >
> > This is a bug caused by a very long string in the RedHat build of
> > PostgreSQL that overflows a buff in the ODBC driver.
> >
> > Please try the snapshot driver from
> > http://www.geocities.jp/inocchichichi/psqlodbc/
>
> If I would remove the Redhat build and put in the RPMs from
> the Postgresql.org
> site, would that fix this issue as well?

Depends if they were built on Redhat 9 because the error comes from the
long gcc version string that PostgreSQL includes in it's version string.

Regards, Dave.

Responses

Browse pgadmin-support by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Hines 2003-04-03 19:21:43 Re: PostgreSQL 7.3/RH 9/PGAdmin Not a good combo?
Previous Message Jim Hines 2003-04-03 19:05:17 Re: PostgreSQL 7.3/RH 9/PGAdmin Not a good combo?