| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gevik Babakhani <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: An Idea for OID conflicts |
| Date: | 2006-09-18 20:23:41 |
| Message-ID: | 3831.1158611021@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Those types, functions and operators that aren't used by system tables could
> be created by a simple SQL script instead.
Only if you don't need to know their OIDs anywhere in the C code. I'm
not certain offhand how many of the non-core objects are so referenced.
We have in any case got a problem with changing OIDs for any built-in
types, because there are a number of clients out there with hard-wired
knowledge of what the type OIDs returned in query results mean.
T'would be nice to simplify the operator class setup though ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2006-09-18 20:28:06 | Re: An Idea for OID conflicts |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-18 20:09:36 | Re: 8.2 beta blockers |