Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> writes:
> I wish I had some way of referencing objects that I need to designate
> (say, an attribute, an index, a table, a constraint, and so on).
AFAIK, all objects that you might need to designate can be identified
using the scheme employed in pg_depend and pg_description: catalog OID,
object OID, subobject number.
> So my question still is: Given the fact that I have some use for these
> oids, would it make sense to submit a patch to add them?
It will be rejected. We removed pg_attribute OIDs some time ago,
and we aren't going to put them back without a much better reason than
this. If you need a specific counterargument, here is one: pg_attribute
is normally much the largest catalog. If we required its rows to have
unique OIDs, the probability of collisions after OID-counter wraparound
would be much greater than it is in other catalogs.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-03-31 16:19:07|
|Subject: Re: Some Documentation Changes|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-03-31 15:55:04|
|Subject: Re: logging statement levels|