From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Chris Bitmead <chris(at)bitmead(dot)com> |
Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Adriaan Joubert <a(dot)joubert(at)albourne(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: OIDS (Re: [HACKERS] Well, then you keep your darn columns) |
Date: | 2000-01-28 04:48:23 |
Message-ID: | 200001280448.XAA10075@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> > > You are saying that you used to be able to get full tuples from postgres
> > > if you selected from base* ??? In other words I select * from base, and
> > > I can get back the fields in an inherited class too?
> > >
> > > I have followed postgres from way back before the 'net started hacking
> > > on it, and I've never come across this (but I desperately want it).
> >
> > Here is how I remember it:
> >
> > At least the wire protocol supports it and also libpq used to support it,
> > until at about time of postgres95/postgreSQL it was removed from libpq as
> > "unneeded" (by Bruce IIRC).
>
> Bruce, you scoundrel! :-)
>
> > until that time it should have theoretically been possible to return tuples
> > of several types and sizes, either by using "select * from base* " or unions
> > or functions in backend.
>
I have no idea what this was. I could have removed it, but I don't
remember anything about this.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-28 04:49:14 | Re: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4 |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-01-28 04:46:35 | Re: [HACKERS] TODO list check |