From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) |
Date: | 2001-07-18 21:35:06 |
Message-ID: | 3705826352029646A3E91C53F7189E320166D9@sectorbase2.sectorbase.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> OK, we need to vote on whether Oid's are optional,
> and whether we can have them not created by default.
Optional OIDs: YES
No OIDs by default: YES
> > > However, OID's keep our system tables together.
> >
> > How?! If we want to find function with oid X we query
> > pg_proc, if we want to find table with oid Y we query
> > pg_class - we always use oids in context of "class"
> > to what an object belongs. This means that two tuples
> > from different system tables could have same oid values
> > and everything would work perfectly.
>
> I meant we use them in many cases to link entries, and in
> pg_description for descriptions and lots of other things
> that may use them in the future for system table use.
So, add class' ID (uniq id from pg_class) when linking.
Vadim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Larry Rosenman | 2001-07-18 21:35:59 | Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) |
Previous Message | Mitch Vincent | 2001-07-18 21:32:41 | Re: [HACKERS - GENERAL] PQexec() 8191 bytes limit and text fields |