Re: introduce "default_use_oids"

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: introduce "default_use_oids"
Date: 2003-12-02 09:30:46
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0312021024540.9834-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:

> > Significant effort has been invested to make pg_dump output portable, and
> > I've not had any problems with it last time I tried it. Please explain
> > why you think it's "totally" non-portable.
>
> Functions, indexes, operators, types, aggregates, users, groups,
> databases, inheritance, clustering, col stats, col storage, ...
>
> What IS compatible? Very basic table definitions?

If I want to develop a portable application or I want to port an
application, then I am of course only going to use portable constructs,
that is, tables and views, and possibly sequences. I'm not talking theory
here -- I've actually done it and made several changes to pg_dump along
the way to make the output portable. This is an actual feature that is
being destroyed.

I'm sure there are other ways to phase out OIDs in dumps. For example, we
could set the default mode at the top (easily deleted, much safer than
running a global search and replace) and then add WITH/WITHOUT OIDS only
to those tables that deviate from the default.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-12-02 12:26:39 Re: introduce "default_use_oids"
Previous Message Manfred Koizar 2003-12-02 09:24:30 Re: [HACKERS] Index creation takes for ever