Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> At one time I was hoping to get rid of explicit entries in pg_attribute
>> for system columns, which would negate this concern. I think we're
>> stuck with them now, though, because of per-column permissions.
> Because someone might want to grant per-column permissions on those
> columns? That seems like an awfully thin reason to keep all that
> bloat around. I bet the number of people who have granted per-column
> permissions on, say, cmax can be counted on one hand - possibly with
> five fingers left over.
I'd agree with that argument for the most part, but I'm not entirely
sure about oid, which has some characteristics of a user-data column.
(OTOH, maybe we could allow just oid to retain an explicit pg_attribute
entry... could be messy though.)
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-07-05 21:57:37|
|Subject: Re: pessimal trivial-update performance|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-07-05 19:20:53|
|Subject: Re: t_self as system column|