Adrian Klaver-3 wrote
> My guess you are seeing this:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/interactive/release-9-3.html
>
> Improve view/rule printing code to handle cases where referenced tables
> are renamed, or columns are renamed, added, or dropped (Tom Lane)
>
> Table and column renamings can produce cases where, if we merely
> substitute the new name into the original text of a rule or view, the
> result is ambiguous. This change fixes the rule-dumping code to insert
> manufactured table and column aliases when needed to preserve the
> original semantics.
>
>
> You would be advised to use the 9.3 version of pg_dump to dump the 9.1
> database.
Maybe; but the supplied query does not seem to be ambiguous and the dump
phase has already completed. pg_restore simply issues a CREATE VIEW and
does not perform interpolation of the contents. If the select statement is
indeed correctly represented then I could very well see creating one like
that by hand and inserting it as part of an external database schema
installation (i.e., not via pg_restore) and would expect it to work.
According to this such a scenario should also fail with the same message.
David J.
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/PG-9-3-complains-about-specified-more-than-once-Those-views-worked-in-PG-9-1-9-2-tp5770489p5770512.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
