| From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Is there a reason why no table OID in pg_tables |
| Date: | 2003-10-18 16:16:14 |
| Message-ID: | 200310181716.14937.dev@archonet.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday 18 October 2003 16:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> writes:
> > Not a real problem, I just used pg_class, but is the lack of oid in
> > pg_tables a design decision and if so why?
>
> Views don't have OIDs (or any other system columns).
And if they did, it wouldn't be what we wanted anyway.
> We could export
> pg_class.oid as an ordinary column in pg_tables, but then it would be
> in your face whether you wanted it or not.
Fair enough - it just seemed odd that a FK in pg_constraint would refer to an
oid that wasn't available "at the same level of abstraction" if you see what
I mean.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-18 16:54:04 | Re: Error with views containing sub-queries with distinct |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-18 15:32:49 | Re: Is there a reason why no table OID in pg_tables |