Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Column name's length

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Column name's length
Date: 1999-06-03 03:36:43
Message-ID: 5217.928381003@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> Also, this will break pg_dump, which will have no good way to restore
>> the state of a serial sequence object. (CREATE SEQUENCE pg_xxx will
>> fail, no?)

> I know I'm probably out of my depth here, but couldn't pg_dump ignore
> everything with a pg_* prefix?

It does, for the most part. The trouble is that if we rename SERIAL
sequences to pg_xxx, and pg_dump then ignores them, then dump and
reload will fail to restore the next-serial-number state of a SERIAL
column. (Actually, given no other code changes, the serial column
would fail entirely because its underlying sequence wouldn't be
recreated at all. I was pointing out that it's not even *possible*
for pg_dump to restore the sequence's state if the sequence is given
a protected name.)

> As a user with about 20000 blobs to load, the output of a \d is pretty
> cumbersome.

Hmm, I suppose \d ought to ignore xinv relations ...

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 1999-06-03 03:48:57 Re: Freezing docs for v6.5
Previous Message Philip Warner 1999-06-03 03:00:57 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Column name's length