Re: lifetime of the old CTID

From: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
To: Matthias Apitz <guru(at)unixarea(dot)de>, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: lifetime of the old CTID
Date: 2022-07-06 20:15:09
Message-ID: 96007955-10da-48b4-129a-a3e8abf4ffb6@aklaver.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 7/6/22 12:51, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día miércoles, julio 06, 2022 a las 02:33:42p. m. -0500, Ron escribió:
>
>> On 7/6/22 01:18, Matthias Apitz wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> Ofc, each table has its own primary key(s), used for example for the
>>> SELECT ctid, * FROM d01buch WHERE ...
>>>
>>> As I said, we came to PostgreSQL from Sybase (and Oracle) and Sybase has
>>> for each table a so called SYB_IDENTITY_COLUMN which is static for the
>>> table and its value does not change.
>>
>> The DBA who designed that should be flogged for pretending that
>> SYB_IDENTITY_COLUMN is a primary key.
>
> Now things are coing to blaming. Nobody said that SYB_IDENTITY_COLUMN
> is a primary key, but it is uniqu to identify a row in a table once
> known.

Which is the definition of a PRIMARY KEY. At any rate as has been noted
repeatedly ctid is not that.

>
> matthias

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2022-07-06 20:26:49 Re: Seems to be impossible to set a NULL search_path
Previous Message Bryn Llewellyn 2022-07-06 20:13:25 Re: Seems to be impossible to set a NULL search_path