From: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: The serial pseudotypes |
Date: | 2019-08-25 18:33:39 |
Message-ID: | fd5e37cd-63be-c14f-86a2-01eb4a5e3cef@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 25/08/2019 19:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 25/08/2019 18:59, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>>> Is there a reason why the serial pseudotypes still behave as they did
>>>> pre-v10 and don't map to GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS IDENTITY these days?
>>> Backwards compatibility?
>> With what?
> Applications that expect declaring a serial column to result in the same
> catalog side-effects as before. The default expressions look different,
> and the dependencies look different. For instance, an app that expected
> atthasdef to tell it something about what happens when a column's value
> is omitted would be surprised. An app that thought it could alter the
> default expression for a column originally declared serial would be even
> more surprised.
>
> Admittedly, many of these things look a lot like the sort of system
> catalog changes we make routinely and expect applications to cope.
Indeed.
> But I don't think this would be a cost-free change. Serials have acted
> the way they do for a pretty long time.
I guess I'll keep telling people serials are obsolete then.
--
Vik Fearing
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-08-25 18:37:38 | "Classic" nbtree suffix truncation prototype |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-08-25 17:42:27 | Re: The serial pseudotypes |