Re: Scan by TID (was RE: [HACKERS] How to add a new build-in operator)

Bernard Frankpitt <frankpit(at)pop(dot)dn(dot)net> writes:
> With all due respect to people who I am sure know a lot more about this
> than I do, it seems to me that extensive use of TIDs in user code might
> place an unwelcome restraint on the internal database design.

Yes, we'd certainly have to label it as an implementation-dependent
feature that might change or vanish in the future. But as long as
people understand that they are tying themselves to a particular
implementation, I can see the usefulness of making this feature
accessible. I'm still dubious that it's actually worth the work ...
but as long as I'm not the one doing the work, I can hardly object ;-).

I just want to be sure that we don't create a maintenance headache
for ourselves by corrupting the system structure. We've spent a
lot of time cleaning up after past shortcuts, and still have many
more to deal with; introducing new ones doesn't seem good.

regards, tom lane