X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AA748B9DFA for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:16:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 64349-07 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:16:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68B488B9E9E for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:16:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j13IGfpi017475; Thu, 3 Feb 2005 13:16:41 -0500 (EST) To: Richard Huxton Cc: Joel Fradkin , pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: problem with backup and restore (probaly stupit newb thing) In-reply-to: <4202618C.6010408@archonet.com> References: <000a01c50a0b$769e48d0$797ba8c0@jfradkin> <4202618C.6010408@archonet.com> Comments: In-reply-to Richard Huxton message dated "Thu, 03 Feb 2005 17:38:20 +0000" Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 13:16:41 -0500 Message-ID: <17474.1107454601@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.006 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200502/71 X-Sequence-Number: 20182 Richard Huxton writes: > Joel Fradkin wrote: >> ServerVersion: 07.03.0200 PostgreSQL 7.4.6 on i386-redhat-linux-gnu, >> compiled by GCC i386-redhat-linux-gcc (GCC) 3.4.2 20041017 (Red Hat 3.4.2 > OK - let's start here. The syntax here is fine, I just tested it on an > 8.0 database. Are you sure the DB you are restoring to is version 8? Looks to me like he's trying to use 8.0 pg_dump/pg_restore to reload into a 7.4 server. This definitely won't work without specifying --disable-dollar-quoting to pg_dump; and if you care about restoring object ownership correctly, also --use-set-session-authorization. I don't recall if there are any other gotchas. The unicode issue I'm not sure about. Perhaps the original database was SQL_ASCII encoding and so was allowed to contain byte sequences that aren't legal unicode? regards, tom lane