Re: db design question
От | Andrew McMillan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: db design question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1035226108.6376.8.camel@kant.mcmillan.net.nz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | db design question ("Jules Alberts" <jules.alberts@arbodienst-limburg.nl>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 19:11, Jules Alberts wrote: > Both OIDs and sequences exist and should do the job, but the question > is, which one is more reliable? Which one will keep it's current > syntax, functionality etc. longest? The db I'm designing will be the > core of my companies IT and will be in use for at least 5 years (the > current one is into its 7th) and a lot can change in that time. That's > why these decisions are so important now, on what horse do I put my > money? Don't put your money on OID. These have changed in the past, are known to change between dump/reload and offer no advantages. In some databases the equivalent of the OID can provide fast access to a record, but this is not the case in PostgreSQL where you will still need to take normal measures (i.e. index on that column), just as you would a SERIAL column, which would be invariant between dump/restore. In more recent PostgreSQL versions you can create tables without OIDs, so there is no longer even space savings involved. For the large-object interface you are stuck with OID for now, of course. Regards, Andrew. -- Andrew @ Catalyst .Net.NZ Ltd, PO Box 11-053, Manners St, Wellington WEB: http://catalyst.net.nz/ PHYS: Level 2, 150-154 Willis St DDI: +64(4)916-7201 MOB: +64(21)635-694 OFFICE: +64(4)499-2267 Survey for free with http://survey.net.nz/
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: