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

Re: Concerns about this release

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Concerns about this release
Date: 2001-12-19 01:04:12
Message-ID: 19908.1008723852@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> writes:
> This is the clash of views between OO and R parts of ORDB - tho OO part
> _needs_ oid and a better support structure for OIDs, while the classical 
> RDB (aka. bean-counting ;) part has not need for them..

What's that have to do with it?  The direction we are moving in is that
the globally unique identifier of an object is tableoid+rowoid, not just
oid; but I fail to see why that's less support than before.  If
anything, I think it's better support.  The tableoid tells you which
table the object is in, and thus its type, whereas a single global OID
sequence gives you no information at all about what the object
represented by an OID is or where to look for it.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Stephan SzaboDate: 2001-12-19 01:39:33
Subject: Re: problems with table corruption continued
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-12-19 00:29:23
Subject: Re: problems with table corruption continued

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