From: Don B. <db...@tc...> - 2002-03-29 21:19:41
|
Brian, On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Brian Bruns wrote: > Ok, that probably has something to do with why it was commented out ;-) Magic, yes. > I'll see what I can see, I'm convinced that the general approach is right. > You have rows from when the table had less columns. That's the thing I don't grasp. On disk (I used 'od -cx' and KHexEdit (which is pretty cool, BTW)), it looks fine. Ah. Wait. I've found a SECOND occurance of this record. This one has that record I was talking about (with the extra data). Hmm. Let me dig more and see what's up. Don |