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. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
