Re: Concerns about this release

> Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> writes:
> > This is the clash of views between OO and R parts of ORDB - tho OO part
> > _needs_ oid and a better support structure for OIDs, while the classical 
> > RDB (aka. bean-counting ;) part has not need for them..
> 
> What's that have to do with it?  The direction we are moving in is that
> the globally unique identifier of an object is tableoid+rowoid, not just
> oid; but I fail to see why that's less support than before.  If
> anything, I think it's better support.  The tableoid tells you which
> table the object is in, and thus its type, whereas a single global OID
> sequence gives you no information at all about what the object
> represented by an OID is or where to look for it.

I like that idea a lot.  I had not see that proposed before, to use a
combination table oid/sequence as the globally unique oid.  Nice.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026