| From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bo Lorentsen <bl(at)netgroup(dot)dk> |
| Cc: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, "pgsql-general postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: OID Usage |
| Date: | 2005-01-14 19:14:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20050114191406.GD1724@svana.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 07:39:16PM +0100, Bo Lorentsen wrote:
> But, does this mean that the oid sollution I have decriped (and
> implimentet) have some unknown problems, or will oid's become obsolete
> in the near future ?
It means using OIDs as you described has very well known problems and
they will break on you eventually. You can mitigate the damage by
creating a UNIQUE index on the oid column but you'd better be sure your
application can handle the side-effects.
OIDs won't become obsolete, but they'll probably no longer be enabled
by default at some stage.
Hope this helps,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a
> tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone
> else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-01-14 19:20:50 | Re: OID Usage |
| Previous Message | aboster | 2005-01-14 19:10:36 | Parsing of backslash in statements via ODBC |