On 3 Jan 2015 12:54 am, Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 06:56:47PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: > > On 12/31/2014 02:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > > It might happen to work, if you're talking the same Intel-ish CPU type > > > on both ends ... but if it fails, don't call us. > > > > It might for 32-bit, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to for 64-bit > > because Windows is LLP64 and Linux is LP64, so sizeof(long) differs. See > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit_computing . > > > > (Yet another area where Windows is annoyingly and pointlessly different, > > like use of UTF16 instead of UTF-8, though at least there they have the > > excuse of doing it first.) > > > > Just use a Linux box or a virtual machine to start a copy of the > > database, then pg_dump -Fc it and pg_restore to a new instance on the > > Windows box. > > I would also worry about collation differences between Linux and > Windows. We have seen index problems with OS upgrades causing > mismatches, so I assume Windows and Linux might have even larger > mismatches. We have discussed a way to test for mismatches but have > no solution yet. Good point. In fact, the encoding names on Windows are different, as is the set of available encodings. That'd probably scuttle any attempt to use a *nix DB on Windows at least if it wasn't utf-8. -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
