Re: BUG #18316: The descriptions of the objoid and classoid fields in the pg_description section, include: 12,14,16

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: 865229936(at)qq(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #18316: The descriptions of the objoid and classoid fields in the pg_description section, include: 12,14,16
Date: 2024-01-31 10:19:33
Message-ID: 202401311019.tks4hnuzi7dd@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On 2024-Jan-31, PG Bug reporting form wrote:

> The descriptions of the objoid and classoid fields in the documentation's
> pg_description section are misunderstood. The description for objoid should
> reference pg_class.oid, and the description for classoid should specify the
> OID of pg_class, rather than "pg_class.oid."

Hmm, no, that's not right. classid is supposed to refer to the
pg_class.oid value of the object type being commented on -- if you
comment on a table/view/etc then it's going to be the OID of pg_class.
But if you comment on a function, it's going to be the OID of pg_proc,
and so on.

As for objoid, that one is going to refer to the OID of the object being
commented on -- again, pg_class.oid if you are commenting on a
table/view/etc, but it could be pg_proc.oid if you're commenting on a
function, etc.

--
Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"¿Cómo puedes confiar en algo que pagas y que no ves,
y no confiar en algo que te dan y te lo muestran?" (Germán Poo)

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleksandr Voytsekhovskyy 2024-01-31 13:44:22 Cascade rules on INSERT wrong behaviour on 16.0
Previous Message PG Bug reporting form 2024-01-31 09:56:00 BUG #18318: Different character codes are mixed in the log file in Japanese locale.