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

Re: pgsql-server: Minor catalog cleanups for composite-type

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql-server: Minor catalog cleanups for composite-type
Date: 2004-06-07 13:33:42
Message-ID: 2400.1086615222@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> Uh, why worry?  If you had an application that depended in any way
>> shape or form on the SET type, then I already broke it ...

> Wasn't it a pg_upgrade consideration or something?

No, I thought the discussion was about whether client code could get
away with hard-coding OID values for popular types.  ISTM it's
sufficient to promise that a type's OID won't change while the type
exists.  If we remove a type that your client depends on, you've got
worse problems than what the OID is.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-committers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2004-06-07 13:36:59
Subject: Re: pgsql-server: Minor catalog cleanups for composite-type
Previous:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2004-06-07 05:48:53
Subject: Re: pgsql-server: Minor catalog cleanups for composite-type

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