| From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org (PostgreSQL-development) |
| Subject: | Large objects names |
| Date: | 1998-08-06 03:53:58 |
| Message-ID: | 199808060353.XAA16595@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
Currently, large objects are stored internally as xinv### and xinx###.
I would like to rename this for 6.4 to be _lobject_### to prevent
namespace collisions, and make them clearer for administrators.
However, this may cause problems for backward compatability for large
object users. As I see there are going to be other new large object
things in 6.4, it may not be an issue.
Is is OK to rename them internally?
--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Roland Roberts | 1998-08-06 04:07:03 | How do I find the table that an oid belongs to |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-08-06 02:04:48 | Re: [HACKERS] SPI procedure for removing large objects |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-08-06 05:27:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Large objects names |
| Previous Message | Stephen Davies | 1998-08-06 03:05:00 | Re: [INTERFACES] ODBC DATE PROBLEM |