From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) |
Date: | 2001-07-18 21:09:38 |
Message-ID: | 200107182109.f6IL9cF12788@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > If you want to make oids optional on user tables,
> > we can vote on that.
>
> Let's vote. I'm proposing optional oids for 2-3 years,
> so you know how I'll vote -:)
OK, we need to vote on whether Oid's are optional, and whether we can
have them not created by default.
>
> > However, OID's keep our system tables together.
>
> How?! If we want to find function with oid X we query
> pg_proc, if we want to find table with oid Y we query
> pg_class - we always use oids in context of "class"
> to what an object belongs. This means that two tuples
> from different system tables could have same oid values
> and everything would work perfectly.
I meant we use them in many cases to link entries, and in pg_description
for descriptions and lots of other things that may use them in the
future for system table use.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
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 | Larry Rosenman | 2001-07-18 21:23:56 | Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-07-18 21:06:46 | Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) |