From: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal |
Date: | 2001-08-05 23:33:13 |
Message-ID: | 3B6DD7B9.770AA22@tpf.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
mlw wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> >
> > The analog of ROWID in PostgreSQL is TID rather than OID
> > because TID is a physical address of a tuple within a table.
> > However there's a significant difference. Unfortunately TID
> > is transient. It is changed by UPDATE and VACUUM.
> > Though TIDs are unavailable for critical use, OIDs could
> > compensate the drawback. TIDs and OIDs must help each
> > other if PostgreSQL needs the concept like ROWID.
>
> That is true now, but I am saying that it should not be true. Rather than have
> a single limited global resource, the current OID, if possible, tables should
> get their own notion of an OID, like a ROWID.
>
I've objected optional OID but never objected OIDs per table.
OIDs per table is more important than others IMHO.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-08-06 00:21:08 | Re: Linking a shared library against a C function |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-08-05 23:01:49 | Re: Possible solution for LIKE optimization |