From Robert.Aussem at lgl.bwl.de Thu Mar 26 01:17:32 2026 From: Robert.Aussem at lgl.bwl.de (Aussem, Robert (LGL extern)) Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 08:17:32 +0000 Subject: Possible Bug in postgis_restore Message-ID: Hello, during a Migration from postgis 3.1 to 3.5 using the Script postgis_restore i found a strange behaviour: In our Database we had a Table named layer in a Schema that didn't belong to postgis. After the run of postgis_restore the Table didn't exist and the Import had errors when it tried load Data in this Table. In a verbose run i saw this: SKIP: TABLE layer Here postgis_restore seemed to ignore the Schema. Is it common practice not to use Tables named layer in a postgis enabled database or could this be a Bug? Yours sincerely Robert Aussem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From strk at kbt.io Fri Mar 27 15:45:47 2026 From: strk at kbt.io (Sandro Santilli) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 23:45:47 +0100 Subject: Possible Bug in postgis_restore In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C02D2E7-97F4-4A61-BB01-B99E99E0ECC5@kbt.io> This is a big, could you please file it on https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis ? Il 26 marzo 2026 09:17:32 CET, "Aussem, Robert (LGL extern) via postgis-users" ha scritto: >Hello, > >during a Migration from postgis 3.1 to 3.5 using the Script postgis_restore i found a strange behaviour: > >In our Database we had a Table named layer in a Schema that didn't belong to postgis. After the run of postgis_restore the Table didn't exist and >the Import had errors when it tried load Data in this Table. In a verbose run i saw this: > >SKIP: TABLE layer > >Here postgis_restore seemed to ignore the Schema. > >Is it common practice not to use Tables named layer in a postgis enabled database or could this be a Bug? > >Yours sincerely > >Robert Aussem > -- Sent from hand-held device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.