Re: Any reason why the default_with_oids GUC is still there?

Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> >> On 9/20/10 10:59 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>> Backwards-compatibility? ;-) There hasn't been any pressing reason to
> >>> remove it.
>
> > Mind you, it wouldn't take a *big* reason to persuade me to remove it.
> > But bigger than that.
>
> Actually, I can think of a fairly sizable reason not to remove it:
> pg_dump issues "SET default_with_oids" commands in its scripts, and
> has done for lo these many years. So you'd be breaking backwards
> compatibility with even-quite-recent dumps.
>
> It'd be possible to work around that; for example, if you don't use
> --single-transaction to restore the dump then you could just ignore
> the errors. But it still is not something to just lightly break.

Also, doesn't some SQL standard require oids, so we should have a way to
enable them by default for all tables?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +