Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Chris <chris(at)bitmead(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL
Date: 2000-02-03 13:26:05
Message-ID: 200002031326.IAA22002@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql

> > Let me add that to the TODO list.
>
> Why not change that to a relnumindexes as well? Easier to maintain and
> more useful information.

Yes, we probably should do that, but I bet some interfaces us it.
Comments?

Actually, looks like only pg_dump uses it, so maybe we would be OK.
Maybe 7.0 is a good time to fix this.

>
> > > >Could you do that for relhassubclass?
> > >
> > > If we made it relnumsubclasses and incremented/decremented on
> > > CREATE/DROP, it seems easy in theory.
> >
> > Yes, that would work. Seems hasindex has problems.
>
> ************
>
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Hollomon 2000-02-03 13:40:24 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL
Previous Message Chris 2000-02-03 13:05:32 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Hollomon 2000-02-03 13:40:24 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL
Previous Message Chris 2000-02-03 13:05:32 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Hollomon 2000-02-03 13:40:24 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL
Previous Message Chris 2000-02-03 13:05:32 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL