> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
>
> "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> >> That's one reason that I didn't like solving it by hacking pg_dump.
>
> > My fix works well with the scenario 7.2 pg_restore -> 7.3 pg_restore.
> > It's another problem that 7.3 pg_dump -> 7.3 pg_restore fails.
>
> Perhaps we're talking at cross-purposes. Exactly what was the failure
> that your fix was intended to prevent? I thought the problem really
> came down to the fact that reloading 7.2 "lo" type definitions into 7.3
> would fail.
Sorry the first scenario is 7.2 pg_dump to dump 7.2 db -> 7.3 pg_restore.
The bug reports I've seen were all such cases.
Your test case seems 7.3 pg_dump to dump 7.2 db -> 7.3 pg_restore.
Are you intending change my hack(? BLOB handling itself is a hack in PG)
to solve both cases.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue