| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: deprecating the use of OIDs |
| Date: | 2003-09-29 23:45:19 |
| Message-ID: | 13320.1064879119@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 18:37, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It doesn't seem to me that this really buys much. What we really want
>> is a way for a dump/reload to remove OIDs from tables that formerly had
>> them; otherwise people will not easily be able to migrate their existing
>> tables away from having OIDs.
> Can't they just use ALTER TABLE ... WITHOUT OIDS?
That's true --- I'd forgotten we had that.
>>> ... and a single SET can apply to
>>> multiple CREATE TABLEs.
>>
>> Not unless you want partial pg_restores to break.
> So is it worth doing this rather than WITH/WITHOUT OIDS, then?
[shrug] It seems quite cosmetic to me. What might be more useful is
an option to keep pg_dump from saying either WITH OIDS or WITHOUT OIDS,
probably as part of a more general "suppress Postgres-isms" option.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-29 23:50:35 | Re: deprecating the use of OIDs |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-09-29 23:18:29 | Re: deprecating the use of OIDs |