Re: Proposal: move column defaults into pg_attribute along with attacl
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal: move column defaults into pg_attribute along with attacl |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22683.1222049691@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal: move column defaults into pg_attribute along with attacl (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proposal: move column defaults into pg_attribute
along with attacl
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes: > Honestly, I really disliked the code which assumed pg_attribute had no > NULLable/toastable columns and used what seemed like pretty gruesome > hacks to create pg_attribute structures. Agreed, but that seems orthogonal to the point here, which is that a column's default expression is a distinct object for dependency purposes and so it needs its own ID. An OID in the pg_attrdef catalog works nicely for that; the alternatives I've thought of seem like kluges. > If we were to accept the pg_attrdef approach, why aren't we > doing a pg_attracl table instead of adding a column to pg_attribute? That's actually not an unreasonable question. If you were to do that then you could attach OIDs to the attribute ACLs, which might be a nicer representation in pg_shdepend than you were thinking of using. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: