[SQL] Bug with dump/restore when using UNION and ORDER BY in views

2002-08-03 Thread Kristian Eide
There seems to be a bug when dumping a view which is a UNION of selects, one of which has an ORDER BY. A pair of paranthesises around the select is missing, and this cause a subsequent restore to fail. This is quite annoying as the backup file must be manually edited before it can be restored,

Re: [SQL] Bug with dump/restore when using UNION and ORDER BY in views

2002-08-03 Thread Tom Lane
Kristian Eide [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There seems to be a bug when dumping a view which is a UNION of selects, one of which has an ORDER BY. A pair of paranthesises around the select is missing, and this cause a subsequent restore to fail. Yeah. This is fixed in current sources, and I

Re: [SQL] Bug with dump/restore when using UNION and ORDER BY in views

2002-08-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Yeah. This is fixed in current sources, and I back-patched it into the REL7_2 branch, but current plans don't seem to include a 7.2.2 release --- we'll be going straight to 7.3 beta instead. Is it worth doing a 7.2.2 patch that will dump people's foreign keys as ALTER TABLE/ADD FOREIGN KEY

Re: [SQL] Bug with dump/restore when using UNION and ORDER BY in views

2002-08-03 Thread Tom Lane
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeah. This is fixed in current sources, and I back-patched it into the REL7_2 branch, but current plans don't seem to include a 7.2.2 release --- we'll be going straight to 7.3 beta instead. Is it worth doing a 7.2.2 patch that will dump

Re: [SQL] Bug with dump/restore when using UNION and ORDER BY in views

2002-08-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
What is in the 7.2.X CVS that we would want to release? --- Tom Lane wrote: Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeah. This is fixed in current sources, and I back-patched it into the REL7_2 branch, but

Re: [SQL] Bug with dump/restore when using UNION and ORDER BY in views

2002-08-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What is in the 7.2.X CVS that we would want to release? CVS logs show the following as post-7.2.1 changes in REL7_2_STABLE branch. Draw your own conclusions ... regards, tom lane 2002-06-15 14:38 tgl *