From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Definitional questions for pg_sequences view |
Date: | 2017-07-21 02:09:56 |
Message-ID: | CAMsr+YFpt0V-8tSRM=dtsALZj-ZhdpHEoCatx3qBGEDgwGDpXw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 20 July 2017 at 22:36, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> This could be fixed if it were possible to translate to
> select * from pg_sequences where seqoid = 'my_seq'::regclass;
> but the view isn't exposing the sequence OID. Should it?
>
It probably should. It's not part of information_schema, it's in
pg_catalog, and it's entirely reasonable to join on oids.
The relfilenode for the sequence can change, but the sequence oid won't
unless we actually drop and re-create it, so the weird issues with alter
sequence operations being partly transactional and partly not shouldn't be
a concern.
If it's to be a convenience view, it should possibly also expose the OWNED
BY relation oid IMO, if any. You have the sequence oid you can join on
pg_class and grab the relowner, so it's not a great hassle if it's missing,
but if it's a view to help users out exposing that would seem sensible.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2017-07-21 02:11:05 | Re: xlogfilename |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2017-07-21 02:01:31 | Re: More optimization effort? |