| From: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)gluefinance(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Herrera Alvaro <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bug in pg_describe_object |
| Date: | 2011-01-11 15:31:32 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimL=on37wDqs+=Ty2_0dNj1Yo7Emh+2oKA6J+gv@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2011/1/11 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Seems like concatenating the OIDs would accomplish that. (If you
> think not, well, you still haven't explained what problem you're trying
> to solve...)
The can be different in two different databases sharing the same
original schema, but of two different versions.
In this case it is better to compare textual strings describing the
objects than to compare based on oids.
--
Best regards,
Joel Jacobson
Glue Finance
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-11 15:35:43 | Re: LOCK for non-tables |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-01-11 15:16:35 | Re: Bug in pg_describe_object |