| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | greg(at)turnstep(dot)com, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: deprecating the use of OIDs |
| Date: | 2003-09-29 23:50:35 |
| Message-ID: | 13390.1064879435@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 18:18, greg(at)turnstep(dot)com wrote:
>> The GUC route sounds good. I'd like to see ctid handling beefed up at the
>> same time. For example, some operators such as != would be nice and might
>> ease the pain a little for people used to using oids as their "tuple id" :)
> Are we encouraging the use of ctids by applications?
I'd prefer to think not ... but they are a nice "out" in some situations.
I suppose we could at least document them a little better.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2003-09-30 00:01:34 | ERROR: "foo_type" is a composite type |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-29 23:45:19 | Re: deprecating the use of OIDs |