pg_restore error

Scott Frankel <leknarf@pacbell.net> writes:

What does this error mean?
pg_restore: [tar archiver] could not find header for file 1765.dat
in tar archive

It means either the tar file is corrupt or pg_restore has a bug.

Can tar read the file correctly? If so, does it find a file named
1765.dat therein?

(Historically, the tar code in pg_dump/pg_restore has not been as
well debugged as the custom format, so you might want to just use
-Fc instead. If you're really intent on using -Ft, be prepared to
help us debug it.)

regards, tom lane

Yes, the tar file contains a file called 1765.dat. A `cat` of that
file shows nothing more than an empty line (i.e.: a carriage return).

-rw------- 1 frankel prod 1 Nov 29 11:20 1765.dat

Extracting the archive, tar reported a "lone zero block." I don't
know what this refers to.

tar: A lone zero block at 9242

I'm happy to either help debug Ft or switch to Fc in my scripts. I
was under the impression, though, that Ft was required to backup db's
with blobs. I am storing some thumbnail jpg images in my db.

I'd also be interested to know if the pg_restore error is due to my
upgrade to postgres 8.1 or macosx 10.4.3.

Thanks
Scott

On Dec 1, 2005, at 4:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

Scott Frankel <leknarf@pacbell.net> writes:

Yes, the tar file contains a file called 1765.dat. A `cat` of that
file shows nothing more than an empty line (i.e.: a carriage return).

-rw------- 1 frankel prod 1 Nov 29 11:20 1765.dat

Extracting the archive, tar reported a "lone zero block." I don't
know what this refers to.

Hmm, how big is the tarfile, and would you be willing to send it to me?

I'm happy to either help debug Ft or switch to Fc in my scripts. I
was under the impression, though, that Ft was required to backup db's
with blobs. I am storing some thumbnail jpg images in my db.

Either -Fc or -Ft can handle blobs ... and actually, in 8.1 the issue
is gone entirely because plain text pg_dump can too.

I'd also be interested to know if the pg_restore error is due to my
upgrade to postgres 8.1 or macosx 10.4.3.

Your guess is as good as mine at the moment. One thought that comes to
mind --- did you move the tarfile across machines at any point, and if
so could it have been munged by a Unix/DOS newline conversion?

regards, tom lane

Using custom output format instead of tar output (-Fc instead if -Ft)
appears to work without error. My initial tests with the backup db
seem to match the original db.

The compressed output files are also a lot smaller ;)

Note that the problematic tar files were never transfered between
platforms. They are written to a local disk and are accessed
directly from that location.

Thanks for the info!
Scott

On Dec 1, 2005, at 8:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote: