Re: [HACKERS] Large objects names

> On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Currently, large objects are stored internally as xinv### and xinx###.
> >
> > I would like to rename this for 6.4 to be _lobject_### to prevent
> > namespace collisions, and make them clearer for administrators.
> >
> > However, this may cause problems for backward compatability for large
> > object users. As I see there are going to be other new large object
> > things in 6.4, it may not be an issue.
> >
> > Is is OK to rename them internally?
>
> Shouldn't be a problem. JDBC does refer to the xin prefix with the
> getTables method, so it's simply a single change there.

I am suggesting changes in later releases to older interfaces can
communicated with 6.4 without any problems.

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)