| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Concerns about this release |
| Date: | 2001-12-19 01:04:12 |
| Message-ID: | 19908.1008723852@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> writes:
> This is the clash of views between OO and R parts of ORDB - tho OO part
> _needs_ oid and a better support structure for OIDs, while the classical
> RDB (aka. bean-counting ;) part has not need for them..
What's that have to do with it? The direction we are moving in is that
the globally unique identifier of an object is tableoid+rowoid, not just
oid; but I fail to see why that's less support than before. If
anything, I think it's better support. The tableoid tells you which
table the object is in, and thus its type, whereas a single global OID
sequence gives you no information at all about what the object
represented by an OID is or where to look for it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2001-12-19 01:39:33 | Re: problems with table corruption continued |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-12-19 00:29:23 | Re: problems with table corruption continued |