Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal
От | Hannu Krosing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3B69B60D.2554A358@tm.ee обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | AW: OID wraparound: summary and proposal (Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Nathan Myers wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 09:28:18AM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote: > > > > > Strangely enough, I've seen no objection to optional OIDs > > > other than mine. Probably it was my mistake to have formulated > > > a plan on the flimsy assumption. > > > > I for one am more concerned about adding additional per > > tuple overhead (moving from 32 -> 64bit) than loosing OID's > > on some large tables. Imho optional OID's is the best way to combine > > both worlds. > > At the same time that we announce support for optional OIDs, > we should announce that, in future releases, OIDs will only be > guaranteed unique (modulo wraparounds) within a single table. What would the purpose of such an announcement be ??? OID is "Object IDentifier", meant to uniquely identify ANY object in an Object-Relational Database ,which PostgreSQL sometimes claims itself to be. If they are unique only within a single table then they are just system-supplied primary key fields without a default index - quite useless IMHO I hope someone takes up the task of putting back some of the niftier features of original Postgres/postgres95 and adding more OO features. Deprecating OIDs won't help there . -------------------- Hannu
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: