Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: t_self as system column

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: t_self as system column
Date: 2010-07-05 18:08:07
Message-ID: 19647.1278353287@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> Is there a reason we don't have t_self as one of the system columns that
> you can examine from SQL?  I'd propose its addition otherwise.

pg_attribute bloat?  I'm a bit hesitant to add a row per table for
something we've gotten along without for so long, especially something
with as bizarre a definition as "t_self" has got.

At one time I was hoping to get rid of explicit entries in pg_attribute
for system columns, which would negate this concern.  I think we're
stuck with them now, though, because of per-column permissions.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2010-07-05 18:12:47
Subject: Re: Buildfarm + Git tryouts
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2010-07-05 17:40:18
Subject: t_self as system column

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group