On Sat, 2012-09-08 at 02:04 +0200, Erwin Brandstetter wrote:
> On 05.09.2012 23:12, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-08-31 at 23:55 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 16:57 +0200, Erwin Brandstetter wrote:
> >>> On 27.08.2012 16:37, Erwin Brandstetter wrote:
> >>>> Aloha!
> >>>>
> >>>> I think I ran into this regression with v1.16 beta4 and filed a ticket.
> >>>> So far I have seen this to affect indexes, primary keys and foreign keys
> >>>> But *not* tables, views, function, triggers, sequences or types ...
> >>>>
> >>>> Added two small screenshots to the ticket to compare 1.4 and 1.16b4
> >>>> http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/ticket/377
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards
> >>>> Erwin
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> I tried to add more details to the ticket, buthttp://code.pgadmin.org/trac/ decided to answer with error
messages.. seems to be offline for now?
> >>> I'll add my findings here:
> >>>
> >>> Also seems to affect foreign keys and unique indexes.
> >>> But *not* tables, views, function, triggers, sequences or types ...
> >>> Tested with PostgreSQL 9.1 and 8.4
> >>>
> >>> However, in seemingly arbitrary rare cases it works as it should. It's always the same for all objects under one
tableso far. I tried but failed to
> >>> spot a difference between the involved tables.
> >>>
> >> As you said, the trac site seems to be done right now, so I can't check
> >> your screenshots. I know there are some issues with the indexes right
> >> now. See the thread intitled "pgAdmin III commit: Lots of work on
> >> domains, and check constraints". I have a patch that may fix your
> >> issues, but can't check as I can't see your screenshots. I mostly need
> >> an answer from Dave, to know if I should apply my patch, or revert my
> >> older patch.
> >>
> > trac is available now, thanks to Dave.
> >
> > My patch fixes the issue you found.
>
> I have downloaded and tested with 1.16.0 (Sep 7 2012). I am afraid my results disagree, the regression is still
there,all of it. Just like in the
> screenshot in the ticket.
>
> The other thing I reported seems fixed, though: "Bug in SQL script for indexes", where the SQL script used the table
nameinstead of the schema name.
>
Then you should try to give me an SQL script that I can execute and that
will show the same issue. Because I tried again, and I don't have the
issue.
--
Guillaume
http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info
http://www.dalibo.com